An Investigation Into the Way in Which Sir Winston Churchill Used Rhetoric During the Second World War to Inspire His Audience
An Investigation Into the Way in Which Sir Winston Churchill Used Rhetoric During the Second World War to Inspire His Audience
Introduction
Language is the lifeblood of politics. Political power struggles, and the legitimisation of political policies and authorities occurs primarily through discourse and verbal representations. Winston Churchill is hailed as one of the greatest public speakers of the last century. I intend to look at a variety of his speeches and investigate what it is that made his speeches so notable.
On May 10th, 1940, Sir Winston Churchill took over the helm of the British ship of state. He acquired a nation that stood in peril after nine months of watching the Nazi war machine consume the countries of Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Denmark and Norway. On that very day, the Germans attacked Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Churchill needed to inspire his people to reverse the tide of German victories. Although he claimed, "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat," these qualities do not quite fully explain how Sir Winston Churchill helped lead the Allied Powers to victory in World War II. To this list, the word speech should be added, for it was through Churchill's speeches that much of the war was won. President Kennedy once said that Churchill "mobilized the English language and sent it into battle" . Although context is important and is noted in this paper, the primary interest of this paper is to explore the words and phrases, and the sources of these words and phrases, that Churchill uses in his speeches. Specifically, the question here is: how did the speech structure, phrases and language that Churchill used serve to inspire his audience?
In order to view Churchill's use of rhetoric during the course of the war, this paper examines three speeches, one from the beginning, the middle and the end of World War II. In addition to following the overall trends of Churchill's writing style in these three speeches, I have also considered how each speech targets the particular audience who herd it.
The first speech, "The War Situation: House of Many Mansions," is a look at one of Churchill's earliest assessments of the war as Lord Admiral of the Navy. The second speech, "The Price of Greatness is Responsibility," is an address delivered to an American audience at a university. The last speech is an informal victory speech he made to the British people on V-E Day.
The thesis of this paper is that Churchill's use of language, rhetoric and speech structure allowed him to form a bond with the listener that made the listener more receptive to Churchill's message.
In order to analyse Churchill's use of rhetoric, we must first find out what it is.
Rhetoric is defined by Crockcroft and Crockcroft in their book Persuading People (1992) as 'the art of persuasive discourse', her to refer to both spoken and written communication. The Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322BC) wrote extensively on the 'art' of rhetoric, seeing it as an important part of human activity, and so worth categorising and defining in great detail. Plato, on the other hand, believed rhetoric to be about the manipulation of an audience be people who were essentially insincere in their motives. Neither saw rhetoric concerned only with government, but as far as a factor in all human communication; the skills of rhetoric were thought in early school systems long before subjects like English Language and Literature were invented.
Although rhetoric, in the sense the Cockcrofts use the word, relates to all forms of human communication, the word has tended to be used much more frequently to refer to speech and even more specifically to a certain type of public speaking. Rhetorical skills, in the sense of persuasive public speaking, have always been an important part of our national curriculum. Formal debating is an important part of education as it is the skills of speaking persuasively that are far more important than a personally held belief in the topic under debate. In competitions for instance, for instance, debating teams are given a proposition and are told which side they must argue. They aren't judged on the honestly of their views. Students when debating formally are encouraged to see insincerity as perfectly acceptable, provided that the rhetorical skills are good enough. The adversarial legal systems of many countries could also be said to reward rhetorical skill rather that honesty and truth; good lawyers are often seen as those who can persuade a jury to agree with their case, rather that adjudicate on what really happened.
So in some circumstances we place the skills of rhetoric above the value of honesty (as Plato indicated); in others we hope that the skills of rhetoric will reinforce our good intentions (as Aristotle claimed). When we come to political speeches, though, the position is less clear. No doubt the politicians themselves would argue that they wish to put forward policies that the genuinely believe in. More cynical listeners, though, might argue that the real purpose, at least those politicians whom they see as untrustworthy, is to manipulate the audience into agreeing with policies which really serve only the desires of the politician to gain or keep power. There is no simple answer to this dilemma, because concepts like honesty and sincerity cannot be measured against and absolute standard.
Analysis
Metaphor
Recent work on semantics in English has investigated the place of metaphor in everyday speech. Metaphor is deeply embedded in the way we construct the world around us and the way the world is constructed by others. An example of this process involves the metaphorical idea that a lesson is a journey; we take a difficult topic 'step by step'; if we cannot conclude an idea we 'go round in circles'; if we loose relevance we 'arrive at a conclusion'; if we are unsuccessful we are 'lost' or 'stuck'.
There are lots of ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Analysis
Metaphor
Recent work on semantics in English has investigated the place of metaphor in everyday speech. Metaphor is deeply embedded in the way we construct the world around us and the way the world is constructed by others. An example of this process involves the metaphorical idea that a lesson is a journey; we take a difficult topic 'step by step'; if we cannot conclude an idea we 'go round in circles'; if we loose relevance we 'arrive at a conclusion'; if we are unsuccessful we are 'lost' or 'stuck'.
There are lots of examples of when politics uses war as a means of metaphor; when Blair's supporters in 1997 wanted to suggest that if he won, his government would act promptly on issues, they used a metaphor taken from warfare and promised to 'hit the ground running'. this phrase originates from the idea of soldiers leaping from combat helicopters and running straight into action. The word 'campaign' is in itself a reference to battle, and in campaigns 'political battles are won',' leads are surrendered'.
The interesting thing is that this sense of politics being seen as a sort of warfare through the use of metaphors can be seen in reverse when real war is talked about. The shadow boxing party politics, with its metaphors of battle, become much less gung-ho when real victims in real wars are to be explained away. In the 1990s dead civilians became 'collateral damage' in the form of political language which wanted to hide the horror, whilst mass evacuation (and often murder) of civilians belonging to the other side became 'ethnic cleansing'.
The key metaphors of politics involve concepts of enemies and opponents, winners and losers; they do not suggest the government could be achieved through discussion, co-operation, working together. Churchill as I will show uses metaphors with great skill in order to inspire his nation.
"House of Many Mansions"
"House of Many Mansions" was broadcast on January 20, 1940, and was addressed primarily to the British people, although some parts of the speech are directed towards neutral countries. Churchill's effectiveness depended on persuading his audience of the merits of his message.
At the time of this speech, there was an uneasy silence after several tumultuous events had occurred the previous year. In 1939, Britain, France, Australia and New Zealand departed from their previous policy of appeasement towards Hitler and declared war on Germany after it invaded Poland on September 1, 1939. On September 4, the British Royal Air Force attacked the German Navy. On the 17th, the Soviets invaded Poland and on the 29th, the Nazis and Soviets divided up Poland after encountering little resistance from the British and French. On the 30th of November, the Soviets attacked Finland. After securing a non-aggression pact with the Soviets, Germany turned its attention towards Denmark and Norway. On January 28, 1940, rationing began in Britain in response to the war. Two days later, Winston Churchill was called upon to allay the fears of a nation in his speech on the war situation, "House of Many Mansions." The structure of this speech is straightforward. Churchill repeats two basic points throughout his speech. The first is that Britain and France are not to "be found wanting" and are standing strong against Nazi aggression. The second point is that the neutral states are greatly suffering from Nazi aggression. Thus, the gist of the speech is to encourage the neutral states to ally themselves with Great Britain and France against Germany. The only time that he diverges from these central themes is to laud Finland for standing up against Soviet aggression.
Churchill drapes the flesh of rhetoric on this skeletal frame. Churchill himself was a master of English language, he was well aware of the importance of this by a means of influencing people. In fact, at the age of twenty-one he wrote an essay called "The Scaffolding of Rhetoric." Churchill observes in this essay that
...all the speeches of great English rhetoricians - except when addressing highly cultured audiences - display an uniform preference for short, homely words or common usage," and the influence exercised over the human mind by apt analogies is and has always been immense. Whether they translate and established truth into simple language or whether they adventurously aspire to reveal the unknown, they are among the most formidable weapons of the rhetorician"
This speech exemplifies Churchill's command of rhetoric. One of the greatest elements that Churchill dwells upon is the strength of the British and French Empires. By using the term empire, Churchill is evoking images of strength, size and power. He stresses that in British and French convoys, "it is five-hundred-to-one against being sunk." He uses repetition to enforce the idea that the British and French are "steadily keeping the seas open" and "steadily keeping the traffic going." Through his diction, he uses words and phrases such as "establishing order," "improved and reinforced," "more confident day by day" and "growing confidence" to reassure the British people and the neutral states that Britain is in control.
If the images that these words evoke are not vivid enough for the neutrals to join the Allied cause, Churchill challenges them through the use of sayings and metaphors. Churchill filled his speeches with nautical images that were undoubtedly influenced by his two stints as First Lord of the Admiralty . Reference is made to "freedom of movement amid the waves of anarchy and sea-murder," "salt-water highways" and "rough, dark waters."
Churchill challenges the neutral countries to stand together with "the British and French Empires against aggression and wrong."
"They [the neutral countries] bow humbly and in fear to German threats of violence, comforting themselves meanwhile with the thought that the Allies will win, that Britain and France will strictly observe all laws and conventions, and that breaches of these laws are only to be expected from the German side. Each one hopes that if he feeds the crocodile enough, the crocodile will eat him last. But I fear - I fear greatly - the storm will not pass."
This crocodile metaphor helps to make a strong case for the neutrals to join in the Allied war effort. Yet, the plea fell on deaf ears. Denmark and Norway remained neutral until Germany invaded them on April 9, 1940. The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, and France were invaded in the following month, as Churchill became Prime Minister. Britain found itself alone by the end of June with many of its potential allies already subdued and France forced to sign an armistice with the Nazis.
On November 30, 1939, the Soviets attacked Finland, and Finland battled fiercely back. Churchill uses Finland's resistance as a model for the neutral states. "Only Finland-superb, nay, sublime-in the jaws of peril-Finland shows what free men can do." Churchill commends the Finnish for exposing "the military incapacity of the Red Army and of the Red Air Force." Churchill would soon show more gratitude towards the Soviet Army and Air Force as the war progressed.
Also uses contrastive pairs, or what classical Greek and Roman writers on rhetoric called antithesis, he uses this to describe the neutral states. Churchill paints them as recipients of the wrath of the German State. "Neutral ships are sunk without law or mercy," "the unfortunate neutrals" are "the victims upon whom Hitler's hate and spite descend" and "their plight is lamentable"
When listing Churchill also uses, what Atkinson notes to be one of the most common means of eliciting approval is the use of what he calls a 'list of three'. the three-list part is attractive to the speaker and the listener because It is embedded in certain cultures as giving a sense of unity and completeness: 'on your marks, get set ,go!' throughout the speech Churchill utilises this, in the closing line he says "...in justice, in tradition, and in freedom..."
The fierce battle was to come did not damper the optimism that Churchill proclaimed in his speech. He maintained that "The day will come when joybells will ring again throughout Europe, and when victorious nations, masters not only of their foes but of themselves, will plan and build in justice, in tradition, and in freedom a house of many mansions where there will be room for all." The metaphor of the house creates an image of stability for the wartime.
"The Price of Greatness is Responsibility"
The skilful rhetoric and manipulation of language that Churchill used in his essays, speeches and books later won him a 1953 Nobel Prize in Literature. This skill was born out of a lifetime spent writing. He had served as a journalist in Cuba, India, the Sudan and South Africa as well as having written many historical books and one novel by the time he was named First Lord the Admiralty again in 1939.
"The Price of Greatness is Responsibility" shows the remarkable way in which Churchill adapted to the audience that he was addressing. In this particular speech, Churchill is not addressing the common British citizen, but rather an audience at Harvard University. The United States of America has ended its neutrality and has helped to tilt the tables of the war effort toward the Allied side. Churchill urges the United States to accept its role as a world power and to continue to work in harmony with the British.
Sir Winston Churchill uses several speech tricks to connect with his audience. The first of these tricks is his finding commonality through his use of pronouns. This is shown by how he shifts from the subjective "I" to the more collective "we" in order to argue for a united front. "We have now reached a stage in the journey where there can be no pause. We must go on." Like a chameleon, Churchill adjusts to the background of his audience. Several of his sayings make reference to the history of the United States, and he borrows a couple of lines from American rhetoric. Churchill's phrase "let us go forward with malice to none and good will to all" is reminiscent of a line from Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address in which he says "With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in.".
A proud moment in U.S. history is evoked through "Let us have another Boston Tea Party about it." Churchill further plays to his American audience by emphasizing that by virtue of his mother, Lady Churchill (Jennie Jerome), Churchill's parentage was half-American. He speaks of how as "a child of both worlds," he is conscious of "the ties of blood and history."
The speech is further different from any other of Churchill's diction because he was speaking to a "highly cultured" audience. Churchill mentions "virtues are inculcated" and "a plenary of principals." The words of Churchill may not have mattered as much in his ability to come across persuasively. Aristotle said "We believe good men more fully and more readily than others..." . By this time, Churchill's credibility had been established on both sides of the Atlantic.
In this speech, Churchill uses the phrase of "Facing the Facts" to convince his audience that the United States should follow his strategies. "There was no use in saying, "We don't want it; we won't have it; our forebears left Europe to avoid these quarrels; we have founded a new world which has no contact with the old. "There was no use in that." The people of the United States cannot escape world responsibility." Churchill more focuses this statement even further by his statement "to the youth of America, as to the youth of all the Britain's, I say "You cannot stop." There is no halting-place at this point. We have now reached a stage in the journey where there can be no pause. We must go on." Through more instances like these in the speech, Churchill tries to persuade the listener that he must follow Churchill's course of action. There can be no other way.
While Churchill's use of rhetorical devices helps to strengthen the core message of his speech, the structure and arguments of the speech are the pith of his message. Churchill begins his speech by trying to connect emotionally with his audience by describing the last time he attended a ceremony of that character. He describes how at the University of Bristol he "conferred a degree upon the United States Ambassador" despite the fact that the "blitz was running hard" at the time. Many of the university officials who conducted the ceremony "had pulled on their robes over uniforms begrimed and drenched; but all was presented with faultless ritual and appropriate decorum..."
This example helps Churchill to confer pathos to the listener as well as further establishing his ethos, as one who had experienced first had the horrors of war. As Churchill himself said after the "dark days of Dunkirk,"
After establishing this connection with his audience, Churchill begins to take a serious look at the role of the United States in foreign affairs. Churchill speaks metaphorically to describe how "twice in my lifetime the long arm of destiny has reached across the oceans and involved the entire life and manhood of the United States in a deadly struggle."
"The price of greatness is responsibility." With that phrase, Churchill defines the future role of America in world affairs. The Churchill wit is used later on in this first segment of the speech to provide levity to the gravity of the subject.
"We have learned to fly. What prodigious changes are involved in that new accomplishment! Man has parted company with the horse and has sailed into the azure with the eagles, eagles being represented by the infernal (loud laughter) - I mean internal - combustion engine. Where, then, are those broad oceans, those vast staring deserts? They are shrinking beneath our very eyes. Even elderly Parliamentarians like myself are forced to acquire a high degree of mobility."
Humour is an effective rhetorical device as for as Ella Wheeler Wilcox said in 'Solitude', "Laugh and the world laughs with you..." Thus, Churchill further strengthens the bond with his listeners. The bond that humour brought between Churchill and his listener is extended as commonality between the British Commonwealth and Empire and the United States in "Law, language, literature."
Churchill urges that the military bonds that have been formed between the United States and Great Britain should be "kept working and in running order after the war - probably for a good many years," until a world arrangement has been made to maintain lasting peace.
Churchill goes on to speak of the "gift of a common tongue" that the two nations share and applauds the efforts of both the British and the Americans to establish Basic English, an international language composed of "about 650 nouns and 200 verbs or other parts of speech." He continues to propound the theme of union between the two peoples. In this speech, Churchill keeps the basic points simple and reinforces them again and again mirroring his strategy in his "House of Many Mansions" speech.
To V-E Day Crowds
Churchill's power with words shines through in his informal speech to V-E Day crowds on May 8, 1945. At this point of the war, Mussolini has been captured and hanged by Italian soldiers, Adolph Hitler has committed suicide and the Germans have agreed the day before to unconditional surrender of all German forces to the Allies. Only the Japanese continue to fight in the Pacific. Churchill's persuasiveness is very high because of the role he played in winning the war. It is interesting to note how his speaking style changes when talking with the British masses as opposed to the American educated class. The first part of this speech is a cry of praise for British nationalism. "My dear friends, this is your hour. This is not a victory of a party or of any class. It's a victory of the great British nation as a whole.' This sentiment ignores the contributions of the other Allied powers. What was once cause for despair is now trumpeted as a victory. Churchill uses the metaphor of being the first, "in this ancient island, to draw the sword against tyranny."
In his "House of Many Mansions" speech, Churchill describes how "many remarkable signs of psychological and physical disintegration" could be seen "behind the brazen front of Nazidom." Now that the Germans are defeated, though, they are described as being "the most tremendous military power that has been seen."
Churchill reaches out to the crowd by asking, "Did anyone want to give in? [The crowd shouted "No."] Were we down-hearted? ["No!"]. These interactions helped the crowd to feel an even greater part in the victory. Churchill then goes on to talk about how this generation of English men and women will be remembered.
After celebrating the victory, Churchill's remarks turn to the task at hand. He mentions that "we have emerged from one deadly struggle - a terrible foe has been cast on the ground and awaits our judgement and our mercy. But there is another foe who occupies large portions of the British Empire, a foe stained with cruelty and greed - the Japanese." Churchill next goes onto praise their "great Russian allies" who "will also be celebrating victory..." Clearly the war had changed Churchill's perception of a nation he had said of in 1940, "Everyone can see how Communism rots the soul of a nation; how it makes it abject and hungry in peace, and proves it base and abominable in war." The role that the Russians played in opening up a second front on the Eastern side of Germany after they were attacked on June 22, 1941 as part of Operation Barbarossa proved to be most valuable to the Allied Powers. In later years, as the "Iron Curtain" began to fall, Churchill would return once again to his earlier sentiments.
It is not until Churchill's second to last sentence that he makes reference to "our gallant allies of the United States." This is a bit of a change from the remarks he had made in September of 1943 at Harvard College on the important role of the U.S. in winning the war. Churchill promises support for the U.S. through his idiom of "We will go hand and hand with them." Churchill concludes his speech by tying in his last point of helping the United States with his first point of cheering the British resilience during the war. "Even if it is a hard struggle we will not be the ones who will fail."
Conclusion
The question that this paper sought to answer was: how did the speech structure, phrases and language that Churchill used serve to inspire his audience? This paper sought to investigate this question by examining three of Churchill's speeches. Based on the analysis performed with reference to rhetorical devices, Churchill was a master of manipulating words. In his speeches, he consistently used a couple of points and stressed them repeatedly. He employed metaphors and proverbs to convey ideas to his listener. He found a point of common ground with his listener, whether it be nationality, humour or language and established a bond of trust with the listener through that shared point. Finally, he was persuasive in an Aristotelian manner.
As a result of this investigation, there are several unresolved questions to explore and several new questions that have emerged. In this research, due to the confines of the essay, the actual qualitative response of a variety of Churchill's audience members to his speeches was not examined. Whether Churchill gained back the people's faith through his words or actions is another subject of debate. Further extensions of this research could involve analysing more speeches and searching for different rhetorical devices in them. A second extension of this project would be to compare Churchill's speeches with those of Hitler and Roosevelt. A third extension would be to examine how well Churchill's speeches were received abroad, especially in non-Western cultures. There are lots more investigations that could be done. For as Churchill said "Give us the tools and we will finish the job."