Compare and contrast the oratorical skills of Martin Luther King and Winston Churchill in their speeches.

Ethos

Numerous examples of ethos, by which the persuasive appeals of the leaders character is used to unite the audience, can be found in both Martin Luther King’s and Winston Churchill’s prose. This is because their personal background, reputation and expertise add to their credibility as leaders and thus strengthen the persuasive appeal of the argument.

This is because King was born into a well-educated, successful family, graduated from Boston University, and, as the outstanding member of his senior class, from Crozer Theological Seminary. He received his Ph.D. in philosophy in 1955, and since then had been serving as minister of the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church. Indeed, King's background as a Baptist preacher in the South instilled in him a keen awareness of the urgency of the moment and the ability to make sudden alterations to his plans. This skill helped King establish a rapport with his ever-changing audience so that he could consistently communicate on a meaningful level, a skill that was demonstrated at the March. Furthermore, his audience were aware of this strong religious and educational background which not only gave him authority over the audience but meant that the audience could trust the leader due to his intellectual and moral high ground. Therefore the nobility of his character increases the persuasive appeal of the prose.

Similarly, the background of Churchill was one of high repute. As the Chancellor of Exchequer, his father was widely acknowledged as a charismatic politician. Hereby it can be established that even throughout his fledging days; Churchill was groomed into the political infrastructure of the UK. This gives a strong mandate towards Churchill from the very start, as his audience (the British public) were already aware of the political pedigree of his background. This is further strengthened by the fact at the time of speech he was the British Prime Minister and the fact that he had accepted the position hours before the German invasion of France (once Chamberlain had resigned and Lord Halifax had turned down the post) this further highlights both his courageous nature and the nobility of his character as he stepped in for Britain at the darkest hour and hence it is established that Churchill attempts to transfer his own personal expertise and bravery towards the British nation.

Churchill’s ethos can reflect upon Kane (2001) and the theory of Moral Capital because it is widely apprehended that Churchill was one of the first people to warn against the rising powers of Hitler. for example Churchill “was convinced that Hitler or his followers would seize the first available opportunity to resort to armed force.” He was also quoted having stated his critique at Chamberlain’s appeasement of Hitler whereby he stated “You were given the choice between war and dishonor, you chose dishonor and you will have war” (Picknett et al, 1998, pp. 149–50). This indicates the good moral judgment of Churchill even before he came into power.

Both King and Churchill establish credibility by demonstrating three characteristics: intelligence, virtue, and goodwill. Evidence of this can be found by the way in which King was clearly well versed in both American history and religious scripture, and he seamlessly weaves references to both into the fabric of his oration. King's speech resembles the style of a Baptist sermon. It appeals to such iconic and widely respected sources as the  (which demonstrates his virtue) and invokes the , the , and the . Early in his speech King  to 's  by saying "Five score years ago..."  Biblical allusions are also prevalent in lines 8 and 77, with a quote from Isaiah 40:4-5 in line 114. Additionally, King alludes to the opening lines of 's "" in line 44.

Similarly the use of war language and tactics are seen to be a fundamental part of Churchill’s as it reflects his military background. An immediate example of this can be found in line 1. Churchill had attended Sandhurst Military School and as a young army officer saw action in British India, Sudan and Second Boer whilst gaining fame as a war correspondent. He also spent time in a POW camp in South Africa. This first-hand experience adds to his knowledge and expertise on the subject and helps to establish the credibility of his argument. Moreover there is evidence of metal strength in his prose via mentions of “We shall fight... We shall never surrender” (19 line 13), thus demonstrating courage and integrity through a strong refusal to surrender.

This feature, of using person experience to add to the persuasive appeal of the argument, is also prevalent in King’s oration. This is because the fact that he himself is an African American, who has had first-hand experience of the segregation and discrimination towards black people, makes his argument much stronger. Numerous examples of his own personal experiences can be found in the text which other black people can relate to. Examples of this can be found in lines 70-74 and 81-84. In lines 103-105 in particular, King divulges in how own life, by making references to his children, in order to make the audience connect with his position as well as gain respect for him, as he possesses the title of father.  Therefore because King presented to the people such real and visual examples of racism, many people finally began to look at the situation in another point of view.  

Both orators also employ the use of language that is appropriate to their audience and present a retrained, sincere, fair minded presentation. This demonstrates their reliability, competence and respect for the audience’s ideas and values through reliable and appropriate use of support and general accuracy.

Therefore both Churchill and King fully understood the power of ethos and were able to convey in their prose a respect for subject and audience, an intelligence and superior degree of knowledge. These combined to create enormous credibility for both leaders and their personal backgrounds also greatly contributed to their reputation and trustworthiness.

Pathos

Because ethos alone does not necessarily constitute political rhetoric it is necessary to now compare and contrast the pathos of both speeches. Both King and Churchill employ a wide range of rhetorical devices in order to evoke emotion in their audience, to put them in a certain frame of mind and to further their purpose of promoting equality.

Churchill in particular uses an underlying method of storytelling in his argument in order to demonstrate the fact that the Germans are strong and the British must hold tight in order to defend the alliance against a well-oiled war machine. This is seen through the opening stages of the speech where he illustrates the story of the war from the prospective of the Allies defences at Sedan. He then continues describing the war in detail. By using personal pronouns in the phrase ‘I asked’ for instance, notably in paragraph 5, it accentuates the idea of a story being told.

In comparison, King also uses a method of storytelling to demonstrate the fact that the ‘negro’ population of America were being suppressed by the ‘white’ population. This is primarily seen in paragraphs 2 and 3, lines 4-18 where King tells a brief story about the struggles felt by the ‘negro’ population.

Hereby in direct comparison it can be apprehended that King does not prolong the story telling element in his prose as much as Churchill does. This is because albeit both speeches are seen to be deliberative, it has to be appreciated that Churchill had to inform his audience more of the on-goings of the war due to the fact that media coverage was not as strong as it was in King’s time, hence amplifying the time period gap between the two rhetorics.

Churchill further uses the notion of storytelling in order to signify the losses suffered by the British, for example in paragraphs 13 & 14 he refers to the loss of 30,000 men to appeal to the audience. To further emphasize this sense of loss he adds that thousands of guns have been lost as well as the thousands of wounded military personnel. Paragraph 13 line 6 is particularly emotive because it informs the audience of the fact that the President of the board of trade was absent from parliament as his son had been killed in war. This helps Churchill highlight the suffering and direct impact of the war towards his audience.

In contrast King refers to the suffering of the ‘negro’ population in America for example in paragraphs 4 & 5. He employs the technique of comparing the injustice against the black population to a bad check, which is evocative of ‘insufficient funds’. This helps to portray the oppression that the ‘black’ population in America have severed against them. By doing so he triggers emotions of injustice and empathy amongst the audience, and thus emphasising the need for change.

Churchill also uses plural pronouns ‘we’, ‘ours’ and ‘us’ in order to unite the audience and to create a bond between the nation. This is best exemplified in paragraph 17, line 9. The Proper Noun “British” is repeated 26 times and personal pronouns “us” 10 times and “our” 31 times and so repetition is used for emphatic effect.

This notion is reflected in King’s rhetoric whereby he attempts to unite the entire population of America as one sole entity by also employing the plural pronoun ‘we’ to unite the audience. In addition, throughout the speech, he also uses “our” and “we” when referring to others. This is done in order to emphasize that he is not talking specifically to white Americans or black Americans, but to the country as a whole. This is supported by lines 63-66. Like Churchill, King too uses repetition for empathic effect as he uses “we” 30 times, “our” 17 times, “nation” 10 times and “America” 5 times. Therefore this is another similarity between both speeches.

 Pitner (2007) defines Anaphora as the repetition of the same word or phrase at the beginning of successive sentences or clauses. It is used to embed an idea in the reader's or listener's mind. The effect is that the anaphoric word or phrase stays with the person long after the reading is finished. One very famous use of anaphora in Churchill's speech, is the use of the anaphoric phrase “we shall.” It is seen that he states several times towards the latter stages of the speech the words “We shall fight” and repeats this seven times in paragraph 19 within one long extended sentence. By doing so Churchill is allowing the audience to grasp a sense of strength and necessity.  

King also implements this technique in his rhetoric. The most widely cited example of anaphora is the phrase "I have a dream..." which is repeated eight times as King paints a picture of an integrated and unified America for his audience. Emphasis through repetition makes his phrases more memorable, and forces the audience to continuously feel the emotion and deeply think about the changes that could be made in the world. He also repeats theme words throughout his speech.

Churchill employs the use of metaphors to further illustrate and emphasise the points of his argument. An example of this can be found in paragraph 4, line 1 which emphasises the threat posed by the Germans through the use of hyperbole. He does this in order to emphasise the prime motive of his rhetoric which is defence against an onslaught from the Germans.  Similarly, King also uses metaphors in order to highlight the contrast between two abstract concepts. For example, to contrast segregation with racial justice, King evokes the contrasting metaphors of dark and desolate valley (of segregation) and sunlit path (of racial justice). This can be found in lines 38-39 and helps to signify the main motives of his speech to unite his audience.

Therefore, after a cross examination of the speeches it can be seen that both leaders use similar techniques in order to further the pathos aspect of political rhetoric. Both have inclusive aspects of anaphora, repetition and storytelling in order to trigger strong emotions from the audience. The main difference that has arisen is that whilst Churchill utilizes more of a story telling method within his prose, in King’s speech there is greater use of metaphors for emphatic effect. It can be argued that is due to the time gap between the speeches.

Logos

Having analysed the contribution of ethos and pathos towards the political rhetoric, it is necessary to now assess both speeches in relation to Aristotle’s third category.

In terms of Logos, King and Churchill both use a clearly stated main purpose, a well-defined thought pattern and effective major arguments supported by evidence in order to evoke a cognitive, rationale response. Both leaders mostly use their own personal experience and observations to support their major arguments. For example, with King the purpose statement is “Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God’s children.”

Churchill on the other hand uses objectivity to bluntly state that the Germans are coming and that Britain must unite and fight against them. The argument contains commentary which does not downplay any aspects of the war, stating the situation as a matter of fact, admitting that the Germans are tough. This links with his characteristics developed through his Ethos and Logos.

Perhaps the most important aspect of King’s logic was how he organized his ideas. He followed Monroe’s motivated sequence. It is a pattern that works because it follows the normal process of human reasoning. The five steps of the Monroe motivated sequence are attention, need, satisfaction, visualization and action.

In the attention step King calls attention to the situation. In Stanza 1, King, speaking from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, calls attention to Lincoln’s signing of the Emancipation Proclamation, the situation of the Negro today (“One hundred years later, the Negro still is not free.”), and the fact that the words of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence granting all people the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness have not been fulfilled. For the need step, he describes the difficulty, trouble, distress, crisis, emergency, or urgency. This can be found in lines 27-30 and 35-36. In the satisfaction step, speakers tell listeners how to satisfy the need they establish. This can be found in lines 68-69.  Then he tells listeners to go back home knowing their situation can and will be changed. For visualization, he offers listeners a vision of what life can be once their solution (offered in the satisfaction step) is adopted. This is where King offers listeners his dream: “I have a dream” offered along with five different descriptions of what life can and will be like in Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama, in communities, and around the world. This can be found in lines 94-112. The final stage is the action step when speakers offer listeners a specific course of action to follow. King’s action step occurs when he asks his audience to “Let freedom ring,” and he uses the phrase at the end of the speech focusing on eight states symbolizing the whole nation. By using this method, the structure of the speech is more coherent and this enhances the persuasive appeal of the argument.

Churchill uses statistics in order to further illustrate his point. An example of this can be found in paragraph 9, line 2 where by using statistics he is able to further emphasise German strength. This is further highlighted via the depictions of the death toll and injuries severed by the British Army. Similarly, the references to religious scripture and American history made by King, which were assessed earlier in the ethos category, can also be applied here.

Furthermore, King uses specific examples which illustrate his logical arguments. One way that Martin Luther King Jr. accomplishes this is to make numerous geographic references throughout the speech: These include references to Mississippi, Georgia and Alabama. Mississippi is mentioned on four separate occasions. This is not accidental; mentioning Mississippi would evoke some of the strongest emotions and images for his audience as this was where racism and segregation was strongest. Additionally, King uses relatively generic geographic references to make his message more inclusive and to unite his audience. Examples of this can be found in lines 86, 119, 141 and 142-143. Similarly, Churchill also makes geographical references to appeal to the logic of the audience, by referring to “Calais” and “Dunkirk”.

Therefore both leaders make use of logos in order to increase the persuasive appeal of their arguments by evoking a rational response. Both support their arguments with evidence, but whilst Churchill uses statistics, King uses quotes from famous texts. Both also use their own personal experience and observations to support their major arguments.

Conclusion

The role of persuasion is crucial to the oratorical skills of both Martin Luther King and Winston Churchill. Having compared and contrasted their speeches, it is clear that both leaders are able to persuade their audience due to the nobility of their character and by what they say and the manner in which they say it. This is ethos. Secondly, the leaders’ persuasive appeal is enhanced by evoking emotion among the audience. This is done by putting the audience into a certain frame of mind, so that they feel moved by their point of view (pathos).  And finally both leaders are able to persuade the audience intellectually through the shape/structure of the argument and the apparent proof, provided by the words of the speech itself. This is logos.  

Therefore despite having different cultural conditions, contexts and aims, both leaders employed similar devices of political rhetoric in order to persuade the audience, because they are both examples of deliberative rhetoric.  

Bibliography

Higgins, R and Gleeson, J (2008). Rediscovering Rhetoric: Law, Language, and the Practice of Persuasion. Federation Press.

Ramage, J and Bean, J (1998). Writing Arguments . 4th ed. Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon. p81-82.

Matsen, P and Rollinson, P and Sousa, M (1990). Readings from Classical Rhetoric: Southern Illinois University Press.

Self, Robert (2006). Neville Chamberlain: A Biography: Ashgate P431

Gilbert, Martin (1981). Winston S. Churchill Volume V Companion Part 2 Documents: The Wilderness Years, 1929-1935. Boston: Houghton Mifflin

Crowley, Sharon (1994), Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students. New York: Macmillan.

Horner, Winifred Bryan (1998) Rhetoric in the Classical Tradition. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Talmadge & Burnhauser (1962), The Rhetoric Reader. Atlanta: Scott, Foresman and Company

---