Adv English Critical Study of Texts Speeches PDF

HSC
STUDY BUDDY 1
CONTENTS PAGE: CRITICAL STUDY OF TEXTS

Critical Study of Texts………………………………..…………………………..…………………………………..2-‐5

Speech Analaysis
Margaret Atwood…………………………..…………………………..…………………………..…….6-‐10
Paul Keating…………………………..…………………………..…………………………..…………..10-‐15
Aung San Suu Kyi…………………………..…………………………..………………………………..15-‐18
Noel Pearson…………………………..…………………………..…………………………..………….18-‐23
Faith Bandler…………………………..…………………………..…………………………..………….23-‐26
Sir William Deane…………………………..…………………………..…………………………..…..26-‐28
Anwar Sadat…………………………..…………………………..…………………………..…………..28-‐31

Similarities Between Keating and Pearson Speech’s…………………………..………………….31-‐32

Essay for Speeches 1…………………………..…………………………..…………………………..…………32-‐34

Essay for Speeches 2…………………………..…………………………..…………………………..…………34-‐37

Page 1 of 37
Critical Study of Texts
Speeches are shaped by context of speaker & his/her biases & their reception, by
different audiences, is depended on their context & bias
Composed at different times, for differing purposes & to a plethora of different
audiences. Hence the value of the speeches will have varied according to who is
listening or responding to the rhetoric
RUBRIC
Critical Study (an appreciation): developing an analytical & critical knowledge &
understanding of a text through close study inc detailed analysis uncovering how
meaning is shaped in text
-‐ How language, content, construction of the speech contributes to its textual
integrity
-‐ How text has been received, understood & valued in a range of contexts; how
context influences their own & others’ responses to text
-‐ In light of critical study & your partic context, an articulation of your own
informed personal understanding of the text; enhanced, modified, extended by
looking at text others’ perspectives
-‐ Ways speeches have been read, received, valued in history; textual integrity &
significance
-‐ Discussion & evaluation of impact of context & varied interpretive perspectives
-‐ Understanding of what constitutes ‘textual integrity’ or the distinctive qualities
of a text that give overall unity, integrated structure, unifying concept. Elements
work in harmony one may suggest high in textual integrity
-‐ Role of the historical, cultural & social context of both the composer &
responder in the construction of meaning in the text
-‐ An appreciation of how each speech has been received & valued
Textual Integrity: the unity of a text; its coherent use of form & language to produce an
integrated whole in terms of meaning & value
-‐ Evaluating textual integrity inc considering features & elements of a text & the
extent to which it may possess an overall unity, integrated structure & unifying
concept
-‐ How features & elements function in different ways leading to consideration of
the text’s overall coherence & complexity
-‐ Delivery of speech is quintessential to its integrity
-‐ Reducible to no single perspective
-‐ In this way arrive at sense of text’s distinctiveness & enduring, or potentially
enduring value
It is the coherent & logical construction, distinctive rhetorical devices & universally
challenging ideas that allow for these texts to endure varying contexts.
Due to effective use of rhetorical technique simply translated to the audience, ensuring
speeches are memorable & would resonate w/ contemporary audience due to universal
themes & values.
Elements of textual integrity:
HSC STUDY BUDDY 3
-‐ Kairos: a sensitivity to the context which is central to success of any speech.
Setting, occasion; Appropriateness of speech to time & place. The way context
calls for & constrains one’s speech. Sensitive to kairos, a speaker takes into
account the contingencies of a given time & place, & considers the opportunities
w/in this specific context for words to be effective & appropriate to that
moment. Great speeches exploit mood & feelings of the time to express feelings
held by large sections of community. Keating’s speech reflects growing sense of
Aus identity.
-‐ Decorum is the overall impression of the speaker’s delivery of a speech, & the
persona thereby constructed. Links to propriety of speaker & respect accorded
to him/her by audience. Speaker’s manner/mode of delivering message. If ideas
are appropriately presented it observes decorum or is decorous & speech will be
effective. Decorum provides guidelines from situation as to social, linguistic,
aesthetic & ethical aspects that need to be observed by the speaker in order for
their speech to be successful.
-‐ Peroration: the end of the speech, designed to arouse feelings motivated to
action or change
-‐ The passion of the speaker
-‐ Speeches high in textual integrity elicit a specific emotional & intellectual
response-‐ call to action
-‐ Rhetorical appeals: appeal to ETHOS i.e. what is speaker’s standing? How are
they viewed? Appeal to LOGOS i.e. how does speaker use logic & reason? Appeal
to PATHOS i.e. how does speaker use feelings & emotions?
-‐ Universality of memorable ideals enable speeches to resonate across the years &
across cultures
-‐ Profound ability to utilize the medium of speech & judicious rhetorical
techniques to challenge prevailing social & cultural values, & delve into timeless
issues that carry universal significance
-‐ Astute rhetoricians fuse events of the past to those of the present
Page 3 of 37
TI is the interrelation of all of these aspects to allow for the text to perpetuate varying
contexts in an air of value; how well the elements of which a speech is comprised are
fused into a coherent whole
language unified structure/

use + construct
structure endures
ime
understanding delivery
of relaionship what
between makes an
audience + effecive
speech engagement of
purpose
audience
ariculaion
of ideas offers an
challenges to reassess/
appropriateness re-‐evaluate perspecives
for audience imperaive for
change + opinions
-‐ The latent power inherent in spoken word allows speeches to communicate
ideas, attitudes, values to audience
-‐ A speech is inextricably bound to its context
-‐ Mainly persuade; purposes of informing & entertaining are largely subordinate
to this one end
-‐ Speech medium can act as a potent vehicle for challenging prevailing social &
cultural attitudes, values & beliefs
-‐ Epideictic speeches: any public speech that praises or blames
-‐ Appreciation of their textual sig requires a development of:
-‐ Module B speeches reflect their contextual zeitgeists. Still, broadly speaking, of a
politically-‐correct nature; have different opinions yet we’d generally be inclined
to agree w/ these
-‐ Interpretations will change as time & place changes-‐ speeches appeal to a partic
audience
ETHOS: speaker formulates a persona for themselves through the speech. Moral
standing of the speaker in eyes of audience. Vital for the audience’s uptake of the
speaker’s message.
LOGOS: appealing to reason. Priori (if a… then b) or posteriori (b coz of a) argument.
PATHOS: appeal to emotion. Usually end of speeches, in the peroration
TAXIS: arrangement of a speech. Typically appeal to ethos; appeal to logos; appeal to
pathos (peroration)
HSC STUDY BUDDY 5
Reference
Exophoric-‐ Endophoric-‐
outside the within the
text text
Intertextual Anaphoric-‐ Cataphoric-‐

Contextual
reference e.g. refers refers
reference allusion backwards forwards

WRITING EXTENDED RESPONSES
Why are the speeches memorable? E.g. shape foundations of society
What ideas are challenged? Why? How?
What is your opinion on ideas/challenges? Agree/Disagree? Why?
Reception-‐ yours, others… Why the differences? Context/ attitudes/ beliefs/ change/
time/ values
TECHNIQUES
Stasis: fixing on one point or theme
Allusion: helps a speaker’s Ethos, as it can show learnedness, expertise & wisdom
Antanagogue: putting a positive point next to a negative point to reduce the effect of
the negative one
Aphorism: a short statement deemed to be true; a truism
Aporia: false expression of doubt, to imply neutrality & create the opposite response in
audience
Dirimens Copulatio: admitting exceptions, contradictions or weaknesses in the
argument, in order to appear balanced & unbiased
Hypophora: asking a question or series of questions, & then going on to answer them
Imagery: gives a concrete & immediate sense of reality to the listener. Auditory
imagery; tactile imagery (touch); olfactory imagery (smell); gustatory imagery
(taste)
Invocation: directly & personally addressing someone or something e.g. god
Sententia: using a truism, proverb or maxim to issue a wise statement about a situation
Syllogism: a logical form of argument w/ 2 premises & a conclusion, that runs A=B, B=C
therefore A=C
Truism: a truthful or self-‐evident statement
Zoomorphism: reference to animal imagery, or non-‐animal concepts described using an
animal metaphor or form
Relative pronouns inc who, whom, which, whose, that e.g. “This is the house that Jack
built”
Personal pronouns: used as substitute for proper or common nouns e.g. I, it, they

Page 5 of 37
SPEECH ANALYSIS

Margaret Atwood “Spotty-‐Handed Villainesses”
“Middle of the road” feminist. More passive perspective on idea inequality/equality.
CONTEXT 1994
-‐ Composed in context of a reorientation of feminist theories that began to
emerge in the 1980s in relation to some of fundamental tenets underpinning
1970s radical feminist criticism
-‐ Clash betw extreme fems & counter fems. Q. of what fem meant & changed
roles of men/women
-‐ Strong advocate for women’s issues; not extremist (supports fem but critical of
its extremism)
PURPOSE
-‐ “The roles played by the evil women of literature” Explore scope & genres of
fiction
-‐ Asks for women to be behaving in a range of ways in literature that places them
at all pts moral spectrum
-‐ Evaluates role of fiction & process involved in its creation
-‐ Raise awareness of literary issues
-‐ Invite audience to consider more problematic aspects of a theoretical position
that assigns agency (an active role which carries w/ it the potential for
disruption) almost exclusively to men, whilst women are relegated to role of
passive, immobilised, ‘virtuous’ victims
-‐ Explore the literary, social, political, psychological implications of adopting a
paradigm that assumes ‘evil’ to be the prerogative of men, & ‘virtue’ the
province of women
-‐ Roles played by... used as a platform to springboard into related feminist,
political & literary issues
-‐ Rescue representation of women in literature from patriarchal stereotypes &
ideological feminist stereotypes; but purpose not to push any party line herself,
rather critique other agendas
AUDIENCE
-‐ Tailors speech to intellectual female audience; appeals to academia referencing
intellectual figures e.g. reference Lady Macbeth’s “out-‐damned spots”= traces of
intertextuality intellectual western audience would be familiar w/
-‐ Informal language & colloquialism points more acceptable to audience
-‐ Reference to “the menopause” & using quips w/ parody e.g. replacing
memorabilia w/ female-‐obilia amuses female audience, reflects how directing
speech towards women by brining exclusive words familiar to them
CONSTRUCTION
-‐ Explores role of women as literary characters as a reflection of social context
HSC STUDY BUDDY 7
-‐ Melds 2 literary themes seamlessly together: Defining what constitutes a novel &
outlining process req to write one
-‐ Challenges influence of feminist thought & pressure, sarcastically considering
“the unsayable; can evil women be depicted at all?” Logically disputes that to
negate presence of badwomen in lit= unacceptable. Contrary to belief,
pressuring being applied by extremist Feminists is “tantamount to aiding &
abetting the enemy, namely the male power-‐structure”
-‐ Responds to Rebecca West’s quote relating “Note where she locates the desired
evil. In us” perceived as an invocation to women to find & own their inner “evil”;
We need “Spotty-‐handed villainesses” as a true representation of reality
SUBJECT MATTER/CONTENT
KEY IDEAS
1) Lit relies on some kind of disruption to ‘static order.’ Difficulty existing w/out
‘spotty’ woman
2) Rad fem efforts to impose simplified ideological gender representations upon lit
works undermines its primary functions-‐ medium for exploring morecomplex,
multi-‐faceted aspects of human experience
3) Rad fem attempts to censor lit representations of gender unwittingly enforce
social, political, psychological, spiritual oppression of women
4) ‘Spotty’ women should exist in lit coz exist in real life
THEMES Representation of women in literature over the ages; quest to bring to a
clearer definition the idea of the ways women can & should be represented.
-‐ “human nature is endlessly fascinating”; women are “fully dimensional human
beings;” Female complexity should “be given literary expression”
-‐ Congratulates women’s movement for expanding roles of women in lit &
simultaneously society; criticises them for limiting the reality of portrayal.
Balanced appraisal for benefits & detriments fem has had on fictional female
characters parallels her views of impact of women’s movement on society
-‐ Fiction reqs “something disruptive to static order”; villainesses also reflect moral
dichotomy of reality
-‐ Discussing what constitutes novels asserts that is nebulous, problematic, difficult
to define/ categorise; Lists “what novels are not” “political tracts” “how-‐to
books” “not primarily, moral tracts”
FEMINISM
-‐ Criticises extreme feminist critics who show tendency “to polarise morality by
gender-‐ that is, women were intrinsically good & men bad.” Strongly challenges
why “bad behaviour” should unrealistically “be reserved for men” denying the
complexity of women & the propensity to be equally flawed
LANGUAGE & TECHNIQUES
-‐ Metanoia “But is it not, today-‐ well, somehow unfeminist-‐ to depict a woman
behaving badly?” Pts classic irony & thus, inadequacies of feminism: idea of
feminist ideology forcing women into restrictive roles-‐ in some sense more
restrictive than patriarchal roles they initially critiqued; pinpts true liberation as
that which is “disruptive to static order.”
Page 7 of 37
-‐ Moves from logos to ethos w/ breakfast anecdote. Function contd throughout
speech; system of reasoning appeals strongly to logos but is grounded in
everyday reality
-‐ Breakfast anecdote w/ multiple ironic literary references & allusions. E.g.
questioning style of play as “maybe Andy Warhol?” which revelled in stasis,
relating “the audience grew restless”. Conclusion: req that in literature
“something else has to happen... something more than a kind of eternal
breakfast”
-‐ Appeal to ethos: anecdote referring to her correspondence w/ readers; alluding
to biblical story of creation. “I sometimes get a question... ‘Why don’t you make
the men stronger?’” Ans “It was not... I who created Adam so subject to
temptation that he sacrificed eternal life for an apple.” Postulates w/ absurd
humour that God is “among other things, an author” “just as enamoured of
character flaws.” Leads to central spine of argument vs feminist dictum that
women should be only portrayed positively in literature in order to counteract
the effects of patriarchal representations which present women negatively-‐
NEITHER IS REAL
-‐ In attempting to define what the novel is uses anaphoric neg statements which
she amplifies, teasing out their inherent contradictions e.g. “Novels are not
sociological textbooks, although they may contain social comment & criticism.”
Concludes novels are ambiguous & multi-‐faceted coz attempt to grapple w/
human condition
-‐ Metaphor “the novel has its roots in the mud” i.e. in real life, no matter how
‘muddy’ it is. Inherent reflection of reality. Connected w/ critical appraisal of
contribution of women’s movement to literature. Uses antithetic dirimens
copulation to ack benefits gleaned from movement e.g. expansion of female
roles in literature
-‐ Employs pat phrases of early feminists vs them in ironic tone to demonstrate
way in which movement somewhat opposite of ‘liberation for women. “Were
women to be homogenised...& deprived of free will-‐ as in, ‘the patriarchy made
her do it?’” destructs this position as logically & morally untenable
-‐ Personal anecdote of seeing Snow White & the Seven Dwarfs. Express the ironic
& paradoxical notion that good is bad (“Snow White is a vampire” &, through her
wonder at the power of the representation of “the evil queen,” implies that bad
is good
-‐ Proceeds in number of seemingly tangential directions (structural feature? That
reinforces argument for necessity of disruption?)
-‐ Distinction betw critic & novelist read as implicit plea for understanding on part
of fem. Antithesis & simile the novelist ask “What can I get away w/?’-‐ “as if the
novel itself were a kind of bank robbery.” Critic acts as a kind of police officer
“Aha! You can’t get away w/ that!”
-‐ Authority est through impression of objectivity created by her willingness to
counter her criticisms w/ an erudite overview of benefits of rad. Fem; Effortlessly
shifts betw. Prosaic voice of novelist & ‘objective voice’ of critic
HSC STUDY BUDDY 9
-‐ Parody, alliteration: oppression of women through rad fem assumption that it
was only men who could behave badly. “Was the only plot to be “The Perils of
Pauline”...salt-‐mines of goodness”
-‐ Ironic inversion to sardonically depict ways which rad fem simultaneously
operated to entrench women’s oppression by denying them their “will to
power.” “Was it at all permissible to talk.... ‘If You Can’t Say Anything Nice, Don’t
Say Anything At All?”
TONE/ STYLE OF ADDRESS
-‐ Tone= mocking, flippant, challenging; suggestive but tactful; Conversant tone
inclusion
-‐ Style of address-‐ conversational & engaging w/ direct/inclusive language “you
probably got the idea”
-‐ Personal anecdote & asides add emphasis to premise that “bad women in
literature” are necessary for realism, refuting the “unfeminist” contemp
approach that denies their legitimacy
-‐ Use of hypophora effective device coz appears natural, conversational, helps
maintain interest & curiosity in what is discussed
-‐ Informality & colloquialismscomments accessible: “flogging a few dead
horses” “juicy parts”
-‐ Asides directly engage audience “I’d bet you’re more likely to know which play
Iago is in”
ENTERTAINING BUT UNORTHODOX; PSEUDO-‐SERIOUS APPROACH IN EXPLORING
IMPORTANT ISSUES
-‐ Biblical imagery & occas. Adopts teasingly irreverent style: “It was not after all, I
who created Adam”
-‐ Perceptions of male weakness effectively shown by depicting Adam as foolishly
“sacrificing eternal life for an apple”
-‐ Flippancy (“Shakespeare is not big on breakfast openings”) & colloquial phrases
(“sex bomb” “evil grannies” “sex-‐saint”) increase satiric impact
NATURE OF THE TEXT
-‐ Casual & entertaining speech combines celebration of literature w/ topical issues
of feminism & notion of literature reflecting reality
-‐ Witty & original; thought provoking & acerbically satirical yet intellectually
grounded
-‐ Skirts the extremities of feminist sensitivities & changing societal roles of women
-‐ Free flowing dialogue containing pertinent thoughts on creation of literature &
its relationship w/ the audience
RECEPTION
-‐ Changing social perceptions make classification of “bad” female literary figures
problematic
-‐ Balanced evaluation of benefits fostered by the Women’s Movement vs criticism
for its limiting female representation in literature; Some condemn for “selling
out on the cause” & ongoing clash betw fem & counter-‐fem movement is
speech’s subtext
Page 9 of 37
-‐Contentious issue but diplomatic in way phrases criticism of fem excess in trying
to falsify the depiction of women in lit; Aim not polarise debate or antagonise
certain members of audience level of placation in tone “I’m not suggesting an
agenda... just wondering”
-‐ Intellect evident in sprinkled references to literary & non-‐literary iconic figures;
‘Name dropping’ tech demonstrates academic authority of speaker & capacity to
offer broad based approach to chosen topic; Articulate but not dry; informative
but not sermonistic; controversial not prejudicial
-‐ Ack artifice & manipulation of plot & character that is necessary in writing
process but presents strong arguments for ongoing need for literary world to
connect to real world if cont to have meaning
-‐ Some rad fem’s argued speech reflected a flawed liberal humanist conception of
lit as “value-‐neutral” (removed from inescapable political tensions of everyday
human interactions). Criticised for failing to consid polit implications of
repositioning female characters in the role of ‘villainess’ e.g. ‘spotty’ woman
seen to reinforce trad notions of ‘the feminine’ as a source of suspicion, as
‘abject’ or fundamentally corruptible
-‐ Many partic younger fems welcome Atwood’s critique; No longer regarded
ideological over-‐simplifications of 1970s rad fem theory as relevant
-‐ Mixed reception divided largely (although not exclusively) along generational
lines
MY CONTEXT
-‐ Since 90s commentators suggest Western culture ‘post-‐fem’ stage whereby fem
no longer relevant
-‐ Valid to contemporary audience as role of women in society still very topical
issue
TEXTUAL INTEGRITY Part of Atwood’s skill as orator lies in ability to seemingly digress
from, yet sustain, her central thesis. Through motifs & wit a text characterised by its
tangential structure maintains textual integrity

Paul Keating “Funeral Service of the Unknown Australian
Soldier”
As PM pushed for Aus as a republic, reconciliation w/ indig Australians.
AUDIENCE Multicultural Australians. Televised nation-‐wide-‐ politicians, soldiers,
families, officials
CONTEXT AND PURPOSE
-‐ Ostensive purpose: public, State funeral service. Satisfying the demands of
Kairos-‐ epideictic speech. Armistice Day, Nov 11th internationally celebrated by
allied countries that fought in WWI. Appropriate date in 1993 for entombment
of the US as coincided w/ 75th anniversary of 1918 armistice.
HSC STUDY BUDDY 1
1
-‐
WWI context clear but greater symbolic relevance in advocating homage &
reverence representationally for all casualties of armed conflict. In role as PM,
Keating: diplomatic recog of their sacrifice, our heritage, our cultural forebears
-‐ Culturally inclusive purpose: means of promoting unification & the development
of a national identity
-‐ Weaves into the text implications pting to Aus’ essential qualities. Continually
returns to theme of unnecessary waste & stupidity, lambasts constitutional
monarchy by association. Subtext of speech examines polit backg that made war
possible: suggests made bellicose response inevitable
-‐ Politically= masterstroke (symbol for change)
-‐ Dual purpose: a) honour & hence legitimise-‐ in context of a more pluralistic,
democratic society-‐ sacrifice of all Aus killed in military conflict; b) to reaffirm the
metonymical sig traditionally attributed to the ‘Anzac Spirit’ in public discourses
around notions of national identity; aimed to unite country & demonstrate what
means to be Australian by reinforcing values that we cherish. Change thought
-‐ WWI context springboard for glorification of universal value of peace
-‐ At domestic level reflected some of the politico-‐cultural re-‐conceptualisations
that were occurring around the idea of national identity at the time
-‐ Epideictic: speech that praises or blames. PK’s sensitivity to context central to
success of the speech
CONTENT/SUBJECT MATTER
-‐ Begins clarifying soldier “unknown” yet lack of info makes him a potent talisman
for peace. Anonymity becomes representational-‐ mark of respect for all soldiers
-‐ Sig of US to modern Aus culture evoked in inclusive terms “He is all of them. And
he is one of us.” Stats broaden notions of US as representational; highlight extent
of war/futile loss of life.
-‐ “The Great War” described w/out glorification as “a mad, brutal, awful
struggle... the waste of human life was so terrible that some said victory was
scarcely discernible from defeat.” Bluntnessemphasis not on battle but spirit
w/ which fought
-‐ Sense of purposelessness dispelled as gained “a lesson which transcended the
horror & tragedy & the inexcusable folly.” Notion of a lesson connects
synonymously w/ argument of country maturing & growing away from parent
country. Paradoxical lesson is “about ordinary people-‐ & the lesson was that they
were not ordinary.” Ordinary, average man & woman can achieve something
extraordinary. Revisionist perception of personal victory, courage, ingenuity
-‐ Patriotism & commemoration inexorably linked w/in speech due to way speaker
emotively combines demo ideals of “courage & ingenuity in adversity” w/ the
“free & independent spirits” for which Aus renowned: US enshrined on national
consciousness & instrumental to liberal democracy
CONSTRUCTION
-‐ From the outset sombre mood but lifted from 2nd paragraph w/ patriotic
overtone
Page 11 of 37
-‐
Emotional impact b.v.o. juxtaposition of factual data & interpretive inference
-‐
A lexical chain of semi-‐relig & humanitarian ideals used to bind comments today
in tones befitting funeral service context
-‐ Not bombastic or highly emotive but rather a respectful tone.
ORATORY TECHNIQUES & METHODS
-‐ Anaphora of “We do not know” emphasises anonymity of US. 1st person plural
creates sense of inclusivity; highlight notion of person as an enigma. Exordium
does exact reverse of what Keating purports; inference of family, religion,
children humanises & personalises US-‐ audience sense of familiarity (adept use
of stasis)
-‐ Authoritative tone of “we never will” clarifies purpose not to discern US’ literal
identity but to commemorate representational identity
-‐ Binary opposites “city or the bush,” “married or single” est links betw soldier &
widest possible portion of population. By mentioning sev occupations e.g.
soldiers & nurses, appeals to both genders
-‐ Rhetorical device asyndeton consists of omitting conjunctions to give greater
sense of multiplicity of emphasis, “mad, brutal awful struggle.” Illustrates futility
of war
-‐ Pro-‐republican subtextual argument: extended alliteration “country & his King,”
“political incompetence” equate the 2 ideas of monarchism & political
incompetence. In between “mad, brutal, awful struggle.” Appeal to pathos &
logos further idea of Keating’s avowed republicanism
-‐ ANZAC legend connects w/ the Republican cause w/ phrases “to believe in
ourselves”, to be “independent” & the negation “not to Empires... but to the
people.”
-‐ Parallelism used as means of creating syntactical similarity betw ideas whilst
giving equal importance to both. “His tomb is a reminder of what we have lost in
war & what we have gained.” Antithesis of loss/gain highlights war’s futility & by
inference, importance of peace & remembrance. Antanagogue
-‐ Stresses while lives lost a “legend” & national identity has been forged. Idea
couched in juxtaposition of neg & pos, patriotic terms e.g. “horror, terrible,
sacrifice & tragedy” of war set vs. “nobility & grandeur,” “nations,” “ours” & “all
of us”
-‐ Apt use of parallelism “We have lost more than 100 000 lives... We have gained a
legend"
-‐ Speech reflects Keating’s republican attitude, yet maintaining the nationalistic
overtone, through hysteron proteron in “country & his King” technique
appropriate to context
-‐ Meta: “At the heart of the Anzac story” personifies story-‐ reinforces its
liveliness/poignancy for Aus
-‐ “It is not too much to hope... that this Unknown Australian Soldier might continue
to serve his country.” Subtextual peroration towards change as “there is faith
enough for all of us”
DIALOGIC NATURE
HSC STUDY BUDDY 1
3
Implied voices to which he is responding Those who suggest young men’s reasons for
going to war have often been misguided & naive; Critics of the war as an horrific act of
folly; critics who suggest such remembrance ceremonies glorify war & that Vietnam
veterans have never been given the same respect as other soldiers
The conversational style. While speech= formal, solemn address, use of 1st person plural
reinforces relationship betw speaker & audience. Speech anticipates an acceptance &
endorsement from those who are listening.
Such language works to sustain his audience’s interest
METONYMY Term ‘Anzac’ central metonym for speech. Although literal name for
Australian & New Zealand Army Corps stands for qualities associated w/ Aus spirit.
‘Australian’ appears 14 times in reference to soldiers & legend they inspired. Reverential
intonation of word “Australian” embodies a set of values-‐ courage, resilience, mateship,
‘real’ nobility & grandeur, sacrifice-‐ & is a reminded of the essential nobility of the Aus
spirit. Both metonyms contribute to coherence & unity of the speech.
THEMES
PATRIOTISM New Australian spirit gravitated around the core democratic values of
mateship, courage, resilience, self belief, need to stick together which had been brought
to life by the US. Capacity to conflate a patriotic fervour
WAR & PEACE Honours sacrifice yet insists peace ideal situation for Aus. Emphasises
brutal realities of war. Through the irony of victory being “scarcely discernible from
defeat”, & the emotive “waste of human life”, Keating foregrounds the triviality of
warfare. Keating disparages war & the epic gloss w/ which it is painted, gives credence
to its impotence in achieving anything
THE ANZAC IDEAL
-‐ Keating embraces the “Anzac story” forged in the turmoil of war. Explicates this
procreation through choice of diction e.g. “legend” & “spirits.”
-‐ Juxtaposes “sweeping military victories” w/ “triumphs against the odds...courage
& ingenuity”; distinction betw martial battle & “triumph” of human contrivance
embodies nature of Anzac spirit
-‐ Irrelevance of birth, wealth, creed, in accepting this ideology exemplified in the
anaphora of “We do not know” & the implication that we do not need to know
to judge US’ character
-‐ Cumulative elucidation of what values entail “to endure hardship, to show
courage, to be bold as well as resilient, to believe in ourselves, to stick together”
linked through zeugma; Cites Aus characteristics to further amplify, nurture &
grow sense of self he sees as inherent w/in the Australian psyche
-‐ Unification= recurrent theme which both engages audience & lends his speech
textual integrity.
VALUES
-‐ Detaches characteristics of US from constitutional monarchy; rather, betterment
of Australia derives from the “ordinary” man & woman
-‐ Promoting Australian values-‐ belief in ordinary bloke is more important than the
big one
Page 13 of 37
-‐Alludes to Anzac story which has powerful connotations for most Australians. In
stressing that sailors, soldiers, nurses are real heroes-‐ draws on anti
authoritarian tradition.
RECEPTION
-‐ Well received as struck patriotic chord in tune to issues of the day
-‐ Sense of shared Remembrance gave sense of common purpose & focus,
honouring war dead but also promoting national identity & ANZAC unity
-‐ Socio-‐political context of contentious debate regarding need for reconciliation-‐
helped heal some rifts
o appeal made for what tied nation together “whose discipline derived less
from military formalities & customs than from the bonds of mateship”
-‐ For nation to flourish-‐ made clear average man & woman would be needed,
“real nobility & grandeur belongs not to empires & nations but to the people on
whom they, in the last resort, always depend.”
-‐ Generated outpouring of honour & pride whilst unifying country & creating
sense of national identity
-‐ At time well received as it attempted to deviate from trad, more myopically
patriotic Remembrance Day oratory of many of his predecessors. Address clearly
distinguishable in use of inclusive language e.g. moved beyond trad
foregrounding image of the ‘Aussie Digger’ to also ack role of women
-‐ Keating criticised for using public platform to appeal to audience’s parochialism
in order to legitimise the loss of Australian lives in war
-‐ Commended as discerned a lesson among the horrors of the Great War
MY CONTEXT/RECEPTION
-‐ Key theme-‐ value of peace, in this time of terrorism & war we are reminded that
freedom from conflict is a highly valued prize e.g. universality of issue of futility
of war & its suitability for contemporary situations e.g. “war on terror” ensure
speech speaks to us today
-‐ Look to ANZAC spirit captured by US as place of patriotism & national pride
where Australians may come together in unity
-‐ Primarily due to influence of socialisation agents such as family & school, a
respect for the Anzac trad has been instilled from young age. Therefore readily
inclined to regard as fitting PM’s use of binary opposition & Anaphora in order to
position his audience to honour the egalitarian legacy of metonymical Anzacs
-‐ Australian fortunate enough to have inherited the demo & pluralistic values to
which Keating was himself appealing-‐ thus welcome use of inclusive language &
dialogic nature of speech
-‐ Calls on audience to perpetuate legacy of US in modern context; IDEALISM
TEXTUAL INTEGRITY Written in peacetime so why inspirational/memorable?
-‐ Aparticular expression of ideas e.g. men & women’s actions worth glorification,
not event
-‐ Politically, speech more than remembrance
o Speaks to many indirectly & directly
o Does many things at once but does v. succinctly
HSC STUDY BUDDY 1
5
o Encompasses ideas & values intrinsically Australian

o Appease people, families who felt forgotten offers recog
o Evens up tables politically e.g. Vietnam soldiers (Implied rather than
explicit apology)
-‐ Keating’s ideals form an integral part of Australian culture; hence the speech
retains its value, independent of the soldier’s consecration of Remembrance Day
itself
-‐ Sig to extent that it provided a revisionist review of history-‐ honoured the
‘ordinary’ man & woman, celebrated personal ‘triumph’ over military & political
‘victories’
-‐ Textual integrity seen in ability to further its subtextual agenda w/out disrupting
the surface form & the Kairos & Decorum of that form
-‐ Used to encapsulate perennial ideals w/in Aus
-‐ Memorably uplifting & empowering sense of nationalism

Aung San Suu Kyi “Keynote Address at the Beijing World
Conference on Women”
Delivered 31st August 1995. Conference a commission of the UN; forum that meets
every 5 years to assess the status of women from a multi-‐national perspective
AUNG SAN SUU KYI Activist for democracy & General Secretary of National League for
Democracy in Burma. Globally recog as polit activist. Since 1990, house arrest total 13
years. Distinctly feminist leaning/bias
POLITICAL BEGINNINGS Returned to Burma 1988 to care for mother. Same year, long-‐
time leader of Socialist ruling party stepped downdemonstrations for
demoviolently suppressed & new military junta took power
Entered politics to work for democratisation. Helped found National League for Demo
27 Sep 1988.
CONTEXT & PURPOSE
-‐ 4th World Conference on Women-‐ aimed at achieving greater equality & opp for
women
-‐ 1990 military junta called gen election, National League for Demo won. Under
normal circumstances Suu Kyi would’ve assumed office of PM. Results nullified &
military refuse hand over power. SLORC put her under house arrest
-‐ Due to her ongoing polit harassment by non-‐demo Burmese junta gov, speech
presented via video
-‐ As opening speaker, words strike tone of what is to follow-‐ est the structure,
purpose & goals of what is hoped will be achieved; clarifies focus area to be
covered for listening audience
-‐ Reference to “common hopes” ack collaborative entity of conference & stresses
commonality of goals
Page 15 of 37
-‐
Campaign for greater democratic freedom has resulted in personal suffering but
campaigners driven by a moral imperative, her principles & regained freedom
have “imposed a duty” to achieve similar freedom for others
-‐ Her supposition is that women have the skills, wisdom, exp to provide a “peace
dividend” as well as “the growing emancipation of women”
-‐ Uses own situation as example of obstacles that women face in authoritarian &
patriarchal societies
-‐ Position post-‐feminist-‐ celebrating intrinsic value of women for themselves
-‐ Pragmatic & reasoned response to serious concerns
-‐ Theme: the valuing & empowerment of women. Direct criticism of Burmese gov
are muted, as position was tenuous
-‐ Task to secure “peace, security, human rights & democracy.” This, she argues, is
reliant on greater “participation of women in politics & governance.” Case: trad
domestic women’s roles is what equips women, if educated & empowered, to
benefit humanity en masse
-‐ Tolerance= benchmark vs which hopes for future est. +ve connotations used to
describe as entailing “broad-‐mindedness & vision” predicated on a confidence
that enables “new challenges” to be met w/out need for “intransigence or
violence.” Brings security & gender equality as involves men valuing & respecting
inherent worth of women old trads, attitudes, values indicate outmoded
perceptions
-‐ Does not malign the trad domestic & maternal roles of women but emphasises
that even where “the home is the domain of the woman” there is no security to
ensure that she can consider the home as a “haven” or refuge where she can “be
safe & unmolested”
-‐ Peace key goal; Stresses difficulty achieving it “where there is no security there
can be no lasting peace”
CONSTRUCTION
-‐ Ack largely female audience & est polit context as recently released from “house
arrest” by Burmese gov. Why not speaking in person. Est motif of “freedom”
versus restraint, confinement & limitation
-‐ Assertive tone indicates progress made but counters this arguing that “there still
reman many obstacles to be overcome.” Emphasises need for contd
determination, resolve & commitment to cause for female emancipation & more
active polit role
-‐ Movement from the general to the specific, using anecdotal & Burmese focused
date/references helps ground her central argument
LANGUAGE-‐ ORATORY METHODS & TECHNIQUES
-‐ States purpose using a paradox to “voice some of the common hopes which
firmly unite us in all our splendid diversity”
-‐ Parenthetical reference to “brave men” ironic as redefines men not as part of
the hegemony; rather in the minority of the Conference
HSC STUDY BUDDY 1
7
-‐ Ethos: modesty in defining speech as “a small contribution” in comparison to a
“great celebration”
-‐ Argument rests on notion of women’s traditional roles as that of “nurturing,
protecting & caring.” Contrasts idea w/ proposition that no wars have been
started by a woman
-‐ Uses distinctio, positing that tolerance req “active effort to try understand the
point of view of others”
-‐ Reference cock crowing myth shows how Myanmar culture is inherently biased
in favouring men over women; counters w/ assertions made w/in the discourse
of scientific rationalism to disprove the myth. Anthropomorphises rooster in
humorous way by imputing a human awareness “the intelligent rooster surely
realises that it is because dawn comes that it crows & not the other way around.”
Cont analogy stating women’s qualities bring light to the world. Emphasises w/
alliteration, as women “have done much to dissipate the darkness... of despair.”
Cock crowing myth itself is symbolic of the patriarchal arrogance which is
employed to oppress women.
-‐ Burmese proverb “The dawn rises only when the rooster crows” stresses cultural
& polit status-‐quo denies women key social role. Rooster analogy links
symbolically to the falsity of perceptions of male superiority by the assertion that
it “is not the prerogative of men alone to bring light to this world”
-‐ Characterises wives of pro-‐demo activists in heroic terms using zoomorphic
simile to connote noble attributes “tender as mothers nursing their newly born,
brave as lionesses defending their young.” Supports argument that abundant
talents should be put to good use on broader stage than the home
-‐ Deals through procatalepsis w/ “an age-‐old prejudice...that women talk too
much.” Uses polar opposition to set “dialogue” vs “viciousness or violence” in
reaching settlements. Legitimates pt through reference to words of the Buddha
that humans should be able to talk freely & not “live in silence [I quote] ‘like
dumb animals’”
-‐ Appeals to logos w/ syllogistic sequence of logic. “People must participate fully in
the decisions & processes that shape their lives.” & “’people’ include women”
deducible then women must participate
-‐ Uses distinctio of notions of good & evil, redefining the dichotomy as “those who
are capable for learning & those who are incapable of doing so”. Clarifies
women’s capacity for good “Women...are marvellously equipped for the learning
process.”
-‐ Almost oxymoronic phrase “wonderful & daunting task”-‐ wonderful as opp,
daunting as aware of importance & opp given to make sig contribution to
improving quality of life for women in partic
-‐ Burmese cultural context est platform for further extrapolation of gender
inequality in the broader "arena of the world”
-‐ Metaphor emphasise key ideas of male tendencies for violence, intolerance,
“war toys of grown men”
Page 17 of 37
-‐ Feminist address to “our sisters everywhere, from heads of governments to busy
housewives”
-‐ Peroration, advocates flexibility, calls for “the shackles of prejudice”-‐ a metaphor
w/ connotations of enslavement-‐ to “fall from our limbs”
RECEPTION
-‐ Mention of own exp e.g. “six years of house arrest,” clearly designed to elicit a
sympathy on which to build a powerful political response
-‐ Burmese population-‐ majority would’ve seen her as a criminal for fighting vs.
gov. But minority would’ve identified w/ her & admired her efforts
-‐ Internationally, people would’ve admired her efforts as a global politician
-‐ Very well received as Suu Kyi an icon for non-‐violent polit change & elimination
of human suffering & exploitation
-‐ Comments highlighted state of women in general & of communities lying under
tyrannous regimes
-‐ Feminist issues favourably highlighted
KEY IDEAS
-‐ Focuses on issues that are partic concerns to this maligned female Burmese
leader; Peace, democracy, security & human rights.
-‐ Discusses how education & empowerment of women w/ nurturing skills would
make for better world
-‐ States that w/ common hopes, prejudice & intolerance will be defeated & true
human development will occur
-‐ Idea of societal “tolerance” & equality of genders isn’t only valued in the
Burmese context but also in a contemporary context where these issues are of
prominent concern
-‐ Belief that women are inherently inferior is no longer acceptable

Noel Pearson “An Australian History for us all”
Chancellor’s Club Dinner, University of Western Sydney, 20th November 1996: Academic,
intellectual audience Academic historian & a well-‐known, high-‐profile indigenous
activist. Admired for his articulation of Aboriginal reconciliation-‐ “historically”: non-‐
retaliatory perspective. In terms of ethos, intertextuality signals a broad & deeply
considered persona; layered, highly dense accumulation of referenced quotation
BLACK ARMBAND Phrase 1st used by Geoff Blainey (1993) to describe views of history
which posited that Aus history had been a disgrace & focused mainly on treatment of
minority groups . Many conservative white Australians felt black armband (symbol of
death/mourning) had been placed around Australia's past. Promulgated an attitude of
guilt & shame for past wrongs: too negative. The past is the past & Aus should move on
& look to the future. Pearson aim revise politically oriented perception w/ a historic one
CONTEXT & PURPOSE Legalistic analysis of the cross-‐cultural interface of ab & post-‐
settlement Australia
-‐ Main thrust: refutes “black armband” view of Aus history. Examines issue in
historical context. Argues for an appreciation of complexities of the past, not a
HSC STUDY BUDDY 1
9
superficial, divisive one. Concept of guilt isn’t constructive: need more
intellectual approach.
-‐ Subtle legalistic argument: seeks to define & explore paradigmatic way in which
white Europeans tend to conceptualise about ab people. Aim of dismantling
these paradigms
-‐ “It is not about guilt, it is about opening our hearts a little bit”
-‐ Speech was inspired by the High Court decisions & political statements of the
time
-‐ Topic focused on how Australian history depicted relationship betw. 1st
European settlers & Abs
-‐ 1990s= contentious time w/ heated debate regarding Land Rights issues
o 1992 Mabo a momentous legal decision as challenged trad terra nullius
perception of Aus
o Dec 1993 Native Title Act enabling some Ab groups gain control of lands
o Both decisions became a watershed of change
o Days prior to speech, John Howard decried disparaging view of history w/
emphasis on the “dispossession, exploitation & violence” of Ab
displacement during European settlement. Accusation that historians
creating “black armband” view of history, putting unnecessary guilt upon
Aus. Speech whipped up public opinion, generating widespread debate
-‐ Academic context important as accounts in part for formality of Pearson’s
speech & his references to highly regarded authorities, experts, historical figures.
-‐ Directly quotes to stress credibility & strengthen case adds weight to
Pearson’s argument for what “Americans would call a hot button issue”
-‐ Promotes open & harmonious vision of reconciliation; calls for “opening [of] our
hearts” to overcome inequities of past & build a future based on foundations of
justice & equality w/out assigning guilt
-‐ Questions Aus history, supports reconciliation as is a step forward in battle to
improve relations betw Indig & non-‐Indig Aus. “The debate is about how
Australians should respond to the past”
-‐ Main thrust: need to act on past injustices w/ justice in future issues to work
towards unification. Central to reconciliation is acceptance & understanding;
notion of an all-‐inclusive Aus history
-‐ Focus of “national identity” & determining “who we are” est opening paragraph
-‐ Ack current debate referencing as “hot button issue” about “guilt about
Australia’s colonial history.” Extended metaphor cliché “You would not need to
be a political genius;” stresses the “great electoral resonance” of the “guilt”
debate. Cynical about the efficacy of parliamentary democracy to deliver a
genuine debate on issues
-‐ Howard’s criticisms of “black armband view” history countered by Pearson’s
prudent argument for open discussion about complexities of past rather than
Page 19 of 37
promotion of notions of guilt; Clear condemnation of Howard’s politicisation of
situation/issue
o Howard’s charge amounts to a propagandist version of history; Takes it
upon himself to speak inclusively for Australians & gives melodramatic
emphasis e.g. inflammatory tone: “we’re all part of a sort of racist,
bigoted history”=gross generalisation
-‐ Aim shed historical light on real nature of Ab relations w/ European settlers.
Shows how false doctrine of “terra nullius” used to dismiss Abs as prior
inhabitants.
-‐ Raises idea of ills of colonialism through conspicuous appeal to authority through
the superlative form of “high.” Enumerates implications of Mabo ruling: “a
legacy of unutterable shame” & ack that Ab dispossession “underwrote the
development of the nation.” Defined as “critical observations made by our
nation’s highest court”-‐ reference to High Court Justices Deane & Gaudron-‐
implying their moral leadership should set tone of debate (doesn’t state position
overtly; left as an implication)
-‐ Praises progress being made towards “a new Australian history” which tells “the
story of the other side of the frontier.” Reference to frontier war
-‐ Guilt & responsibility= controversial themes but fosters idea “guilt is not a useful
emotion”
-‐ Aus reminded they readily “share & celebrate in the achievements of the past”
should similarly “feel responsibility for & express shame in relation to other
aspects of the past.” Pride & commemoration for heroic Anzacs cannot exist
alongside Professor Bill Stanner’s “Great Australian Silence”
-‐ Rejects that guilt need “be an ingredient” in a Aus history but argues vs
ignorance & hypocritical selection of which parts of our history are recog
-‐ In rebuffing Dr. Hewson’s position uses aporia (“it seems to me”) to hedge his
countering proposition “the psychological unity of this country depends upon out
taking responsibility for the future by dealing w/ the past.” Use of aporia & a
truism in responding to opponent’s proposition implies, in a polite & kind way,
the opponent’s position is idiotic. Inclusive language propagates a challenge
-‐ More strident tone: language loaded w/ less equivocal & emotionally stronger
terms e.g. metaphor “need not reduce history to a shallow field of point scoring”
-‐ Uses rhetorical Q. to satirise idea of a separatist & puritanical attitude of non-‐
acceptance towards white Australia, asking “do we require Anglo-‐Celtic
Australians to spurn their origins in the name of penance or solidarity w/ us?”
Position characterised as hypocritical & not constructive
-‐ Ironic & humorous eponymic abbreviation makes position of “the black
armbands” seem ridiculous
-‐ “As to the question of guilt, I am myself equivocal”-‐ doesn’t marginalise any
segment of audience; furthers notion of equivocation through distinction
between feeling guilty, which he finds as objectionable, & cultural amnesia.
Attempts to chart some kind of middle course.
CONSTRUCTION
HSC STUDY BUDDY 2
1
-‐
Complexity of viewpt; attempts to chart through no# positions that seem to
contradict one another; textured pattern of densely argued pts & counter-‐pts to
reach the conclusion Pearson is indicating
-‐ Multiple quotes w/ contrasting views: presents multiple povs on Aus colonial
past & European guilt
-‐ By making topic seem complex, able to create stasis from position of Logos
implying subject demands prolonged thought & deliberation; Ethos of Pearson’s
statesmanlike delivery carries this argument
-‐ Appeal to Pathos weaved throughout speech w/ frequent reference to emotive
language & terms
-‐ Juxtaposes ideas to raise Qs w/out coming to any conclusionstasis. Still some
apposite comments
-‐ Politically & rhetorically adroit in its avoidance of inflammatory or generalising
remarks, its textual density & complexity, frequently obscured line of argument
-‐ States in exordium “only some... observations.” Dry, ironic academic tone
averring “I fear however that I am in danger of indulging in agonising navel
gazing... I will nevertheless persevere.” Creates notion of well-‐informed,
objective persona-‐ appeal to Ethos
-‐ Delib appeal to intellect of audience, rather than emotions through language &
structure of discussion. Apparent through use of allusions to authorities, as well
as legal references. Proceeds historically in formal register added credibility &
authority
-‐ Inclusive language “we are still grappling” (no security w/ idea); ridicules &
condemns Howard’s trivialising of the debate as “indulging in agonising navel-‐
gazing” massaging majority-‐ inviting audience to see politicians as populists
interested more in votes
-‐ Cooper’s letter: Angry, sarcastic tone of letter & use of emotive words “theft,”
“apathy,” contrasts w/ objectivity of Pearson’s comments
-‐ Parodies Keating’s polit announcement during 1990s recession, the one “we had
to have,” transmuting statement to the Mabo ruling “Mabo threw the country
into social, political & psychological turmoil.” “I always said it was the turmoil &
confusion the country had to have”
-‐ Criticism levelled at ‘Tabloid’ media whose interests are in circulation figures
rather than publication well researched articles. “brain-‐damaged dialogue”
accused of dulling public’s ability to think/be challenged to consider new ideas
“the politics of mutual assurance”
-‐ “Tabloid-‐style slogans that are carefully crafted to activate those hot button
issues in our community. Black Armbands. Guilt Industry.
LANGUAGE/RHETORICAL TECHNIQUES
-‐ Inclusive language shrewdly woven into speech w/ repeated reference to “our
nation” & action “we” have to takefacilitates depiction of Ab rights as being
social, polit, legal concern for nation as whole
Page 21 of 37
-‐ Colloquial terms & clichés e.g. “black armband view of history” connect w/
audience & address terms being used in media debate
-‐ Sarcasm in use of emotive/oppressive terms; “myth,” “the invisibility of
Aboriginal people” also “peaceful settlement,” “steadfast belief in our
inhumanity”
-‐ Christian hypocrisy condemned; Bible’s injunction “God gave the Earth to man”
interfered w/ in Ab’s case by being denied what was theirs “by right of prior
possession & by right of gift from God”
-‐ Historical allusions to Gallipoli & Kokoda Trail demonstrate a proud “collective
consciousness” that should morally inc Ab past. Allusion to holocaust lend
emphasis to seriousness of matter; satirise notion of covering the past.
Distinction betw psychologically neg guilty & psychologically healthy ack
TEXTUAL INTEGRITY Long, v academic in parts & utilises large quotations rather than
Pearson’s rhetoric. Still, layering & building of argument on quotesdistinctive
structure as quotes lend historical veracity & authority. Pearson characterises rhetoric
w/ ambiguity & equivocation. Highly effective & successful at raising the complex
question of Aboriginal recognition in history
THEMES
RACISM Focuses extensively on Aus’ racist history/ Ab relations w/ European settlers
who dispossessed indig people of their land/culture. Doesn’t dwell on injustices-‐ looks
to future & the means to overcome ongoing racism in Aus. Challenges immediate
audience & nation to “accept responsibility for & express shame” in relation to our past,
believing best path toward reconciliation
WAR/PEACE Denies history of “peaceful settlement:” Makes reference to the colonial
frontier & war betw whites & Abs. Audience relive injustices through accounts of
Cooper-‐ policeman shot31 aboriginals in revenge for killing single white man. Realities
of war give platform from which advocate need peace/reconciliation
GUILT & RESPONSIBILITY Promotes idea that “guilt is not a useful emotion” & Aus should
collectively take responsibility for the ‘present, future & past.’ Cannot “share &
celebrate in the achievements of the past.. & not feel responsibility for & express shame
in relation to other aspects of the past.” Sarcasm “Lest we forget”
RECEPTION
ORIGINAL Indig issues topical & controversial in politics & community thus speech
generated coverage in the national media & evoked a mixed reception
-‐ Speech highly political as it criticised the PM John Howard & other politicians
-‐ Media coverage described by Pearson as “brain-‐damaged dialogue” being waged
by talk-‐back hosts w/out real knowledge/understanding of details. Quality of
debate poor, full of generalisations, flawed reporting & assessment of what had
actually been said by academics, lawyers, Ab activists
-‐ Ack wholesale resistance to “black armband” history, many disagreeing w/
“Sorry Campaign” being argued for (Views wouldn’t have found wide support
w/in broad Australian community). Many conservatives feared admission of
“guilt” would have legal & compensation ramifications
HSC STUDY BUDDY 2
3
-‐ Howard refers to stats; Pearson calls this too much of a reliance on “the polls”
(moral obliviousness)
-‐ Stats used by conserv Howard to generalise “The polls will tell you this... most
ordinary Australians are offended by any suggestion that they should feel guilty
about any aspect of the country’s past.”
-‐ Some of academic audience appreciated his comments to historically validate a
re-‐reading of Aus’ traditional terra nullius reading of history
-‐ Most international audiences would be unaware of local issues & examine
speech from universal principles of justice & reconciliation
-‐ More conservative Aus viewed speech as being biased towards his own people
&cultural backg.
-‐ Many appreciated his attempt to objectively trace the history of Aus & present
wide range of views
-‐ His ideas of justice, peace & struggle vs. oppression received as representing
core Australian values.
Modern
-‐ his youth & conservative approach gained him respect w/in Aus community & his
speech is a call to all Australian’s to “open their hearts” to reconciliation, which
still resonates today.
-‐ Ideas attacked by some Ab leaders & politicians on both sides of politics.
-‐ Some people today think Howard is notorious for not apologising for past
injustices & =collective responsibility of all Aus to deal w/ contextual issues.
-‐ In 2008 Rudd gave national apology to the Ab; now look at his speech in a new
context – one that ack Ab people illustrating that interpretations of a text shift &
change w/ time & place
-‐ Howard side-‐stepped issue: at time the catchcry was saying sorry was
synonymous w/ compensation
CONNECTION WITH OTHER SPEECHES
Intertextually links thematically w/ Suu Kyi-‐ justice/pacifist; contrasting in methodology
for similar purpose i.e. chosen to speak for who they are (have v specific audience to
which the speech would have to be tailored to)
Whereas Keating’s speech is linear & single-‐functioned, Pearson’s is highly speculative.
Highly evidenced based; v cautious & tentative in making any definitive statements

Faith Bandler “Faith, Hope and Reconciliation”
Title makes a pun on the 3 Christian virtues Faith, Hope & Charity.
FAITH BANDLER Highly respected civil rights activist who has campaigned vs. social &
political inequality & Indigenous injustice & disadvantage. Heavily involved in peace
movement in 1950s & founding member of Women’s Electoral Lobby. Instrumental to
successful 1967 ‘Yes’ campaign. Humanitarian perspective
CONTEXT AND PURPOSE Speech at Talkin’ up Reconciliation Convention, Wollongong
August 1999
Page 23 of 37
-‐
1967 Referendum: 90% ‘yes’ vote to include Indig Australians in census & to
allow Parliament to make laws to specifically benefit Indig Australians. Showed
strong support for Indig rights.
-‐ Continues to challenge gov initiatives as not going far enough
-‐ Believes in the people’s voice “My belief is in people. I fix my faith in people. I’m
a great believer in the power of people.” Repetition challenge
-‐ Respected for wisdom & tireless efforts to alleviate the suffering of Indigenous
people
-‐ 1999 date contextually important (blunt reference to “talk-‐back jockeys lined up
vs. them.”) Turn of millennium contentious for Indig issues “terrible utterances
in the name of free speech.”
-‐ Recent comments causing “shame & anger” “stand in the way of planning good
strategies.”
-‐ Advocate need for faith, perseverance& stoicism to achieve reconciliation
CONTENT/ SUBJECT MATTER
-‐ Theme of solidarity: not only betw Ab people but all “decent people”
-‐ Comments naturally subjective: speaking from personal exp about issues
impacting on her people
-‐ ‘Sight’ imagery effective: talks metaphorically of “ignorance” & “blindness to
other peoples’ way of life.” Those who’ve actively blocked/condemned
campaigns for justice/equity are criticised but this balanced by ack of those who
despite having “different cultures, different political beliefs” accept need for
healing wounds/indignities of past
-‐ The dimensions of suffering on the basis of “differences” are incomprehensible
(rep millions). Asks “Why is it so hard to find our commonalities?” Cites prejudice
& a tendency to be condemnatory
-‐ Admires stoicism of powerless more than powerful
-‐ Inclusive language specifically challenges audience-‐ references the “struggle to
reconcile” being about “working together” to lighten “the burden of that terrible
baggage that has to do w/ our differences.”
-‐ Emphasises need for joint action “this movement should be one wherein we
should ask not what is in it for me, but what is in it for us.”
-‐ Praises courage of Indig people who were forced off land & some campaigners
e.g. Dulcie Fowler
-‐ Defines reconciliation & what task of achieving it entails
-‐ Challenges audience to take up challenge as generations have before “the task is
yet to be tackled”
-‐ Way forward is pro-‐active, inclusive & legislatively savvy
CONSTRUCTION
-‐ More the quality of a personal conversation than formal speech; Bandler was for
most part preaching to the converted
-‐ Begins ack/thanking audience but asserts she’s saddened coz little reconciliation
progress since 1967
-‐ Exordium personal & anecdotal
HSC STUDY BUDDY 2
5
-‐
Outlines 2 main camps in struggle: those delib obstructionist & those more
open-‐minded
-‐ Way forward req concerted effort to tackle the “hard job” involved in making
“this country a better place for those who come after us.” Personal needs must
be subservient to cultural needs
-‐ Appreciation must be shown for what has been fought for & won in past
-‐ Need for discussion & people power rather than political power
-‐ Posits a rhetorical Q in the peroration as a call to action “If not now, when? If not
us, who?”
-‐ Salutation/invitation to engage audience
-‐ Discovers “a module in my thinking”; negative connotations of division; refers to
the notion of a separation that is set against the notion of unity; “it was getting
in the way” suggests “module” preventing unity of reconciliation
-‐ Short but powerfully engaging as Bandler speaks directly to audience
-‐ Addresses fellow activists who’ve “lived, breathed, struggled & climbed the
ramparts of the rugged past.” Emotive language encourages her audience to
envisage the struggle that has given them the rights currently enjoy; Active verbs
reinforce the notion of great effort entailed.
-‐ Emotional, tactile & somatic language to describe physical effort involved in
achieving reconciliation & to express disdain for “the disagreeable habits of
those who close their eyes to the past, the willing ignorance & blindness to other
peoples’ way of life.”
-‐ Appeal to ethos w/ expression of modesty, sense of understanding that polit
awareness doesn’t develop overnight. Anecdotally states her own “learning was
rather hard & slow.”
-‐ Lists injustices, some verging on hyperbolic “the mass murder of women &
children”; despite hyperbole, creates an appeal to pathos.
-‐ Repetition of “millions” added emphasis to extent of world suffering rather
than purely focusing on difficulties faced by Indig Australians. Pts out prejudice=
universal problem & prime concerns deal w/ nature of humanity itself. ‘Millions’
escalates argument to international. Problems are endemic; Pacifist argument:
we need to change humanity EMOTIVE
-‐ Clichés “not handed on a platter,” “put on the back burner” keep msg simple &
blunt; challenges for people power
-‐ Parallelism “ask not what is in it for me, but what is in it for us” prompts a pro-‐
active response
-‐ Zoomorphism to pt at naiveté of those who don’t seek reconciliation. “talk-‐back
jockeys” collocates w/ “deliberately blinkered” “chained in their stubbornness.”
Stubbornness connected w/ a brumby or wild horse not been tamed, i.e. people
who aren’t learned & lack understanding. Questions moral value of opposition,
taking the voicing of the higher moral position
Page 25 of 37
-‐ “Fair-‐minded people...can come along with us...none is w/out blemish;” hidden
collocation of those w/ fair skin creates visual image of purity, of unblemished
whiteness. Perhaps subtly welcoming white Australia to uptake the cause
-‐ Stresses power of “a genuine people’s movement” cliché “it can move
mountains”
KEY IDEAS
-‐ Egalitarian themes/ideas of race, equality & justice
-‐ Reconciliation arduous task but should be peaceful; Hopes to reignite
momentum for the cause
RECEPTION
-‐ Well received as provided +ve incentives for contd support for reconciliation
process despite media obstruction
-‐ Galvanised flagging spirits & helped encouraged a younger generation to be
actively involved in campaigning
-‐ Wisdom, experience & expertise of such a seasoned campaigner gave authority
& legitimacy to Bandler’s recommendations
-‐ Highlighted gov tendencies to let polit situations stagnate unless pressure was
maintained
-‐ Clarified way forward “it’s our job to make sure” that rights are recognised &
that “the process of reconciliation” be quickened
TEXTUAL INTEGRITY Inherent honest & emotional attachment
COMPARISONS
Bandler speaks of the process of Reconciliation whilst Pearson speaks of the history of
Reconciliation & its various interpretations. Pearson-‐ political, intellectual, academic
standpoint whilst Bandler is largely subjective/personal

Sir William Deane “On the occasion of an ecumenical
service for the victims of the canyoning tragedy”
Speech by Governor General of Australia on the 5th August 1999
CONTEXT & PURPOSE speech is entirely functional;
-‐ 27th July 1999, 14 Australians perished in canyoning accident near Interlaken in
Switzerland
-‐ Howard “worst tragedy ever to occur overseas & affect young Australians outside
the theatre of war”
-‐ 21 young adults aged 19 to 31, killed when a flash flood swept through the
Saxetbach Gorge.
-‐ Expedition organised by local Swiss company, Adventure World, whose guides
had ignored notice of pending storm which had caused surge of flood waters;
disaster highlighted many travel companies lacked adequate prep & resources to
cope w/ such a crisis
-‐ Explicit purpose “to mourn” & “pray with them for their loved ones who have
died.”
HSC STUDY BUDDY 2
7
-‐
On “behalf of Australia & of all Australians” speaker becomes representative
figure
-‐ Dual purpose in a) honouring memory of young lives that were lost that were
specifically Australian & b) settle waters of diplomacy that had been ruffled
because of it. I.e. humanist & diplomatic purpose
-‐ “ecumenical service” pay homage to dead & offer comfort to mourners
-‐ Tone appropriately sombre: Biblical references & terms:
“mourn,”“loss,”“prayers;” Need for Spiritual comfort unites them in coping w/
deaths; represents personal & national loss & unfulfilled potential
-‐ Sir William Deane echoes Howard “Collectively, their deaths represent probably
the greatest single peacetime loss of young Australians outside our own country”
-‐ To die far from home augments tragedy of loss Aus identity asserted “the land
they loved so well”
-‐ Switzerland given especial recog as being on opposite side of world & yet “one
effect of the disasters has been to bring our two countries closer together” Grief
unites them
-‐ Victims spoken of as being young, exuberant, spirited, “a shining part-‐ of our
humanity.”
-‐ Sentiments of grief, loss & mourning; Symbolic act of national solidarity and
mourning
CONSTRUCTION
-‐ Blame not apportioned, instead praise valiant efforts of those who
rescue/support people involved
-‐ Especially pains to express “condolences,” “gratitude” “Tribute” to those who
helped “look after the survivors & the relatives who have come here”
-‐ Stresses “collective loss” & sig of wattle. Officials & families join together in
casting sprigs of wattle, “our national floral emblem” into water. Deaths forever
link Aus, Switzerland, other nations involved
-‐ Measured diplomatic tone underscores ideas of speech
-‐ “profound tragedy” superlative highlights affected people on all levels
-‐ Inclusive language “We pray with them for their loved ones” ensures all
nationalities addressed
-‐ Nature of disaster stressed through recurrent use of “tragedy”
-‐ Hyperbole “On every night since the accident... in all our newspapers”
emphasises how ironically, a neg situation provided pos results. Also veiled
reference to media hype surrounding tragedy
-‐ Switzerland praised, sibilance enhances +ve impression of their response to “the
shock & sorrow”
-‐ Expresses thanks w/ definiteness & clarity in ack “the competence, the
compassion & the kindness of all who have helped.”
Page 27 of 37
-‐ Deane uses balanced approach “on this solemn occasion” in countering grief w/
thanks
-‐ John Donne poem quoted ““No man is an island”. Anyone’s “death diminishes”
us all because we are all “involved in mankind”” Common humanity broadens
speaker’s audience base
-‐ Veiled thematic reference to Rupert Brooke’s war poem as sprigs of wattle
thrown into Saxetenbach “was bringing a little of Australia to them” &
conversely “helping to bring them home to our country.” Additional layer of
symbolism that links two countries
-‐ Aus characteristics “the spirit of adventure, the joy of living, the exuberance &
the delight of youth”
-‐ “But the golden wattles are coming into bloom” extended metaphor of rebirth
and renewal
IDEAS Tridental purpose: expression of sentiment, the global village & diplomatic
sensitivities
RECEPTION
-‐ Well received as a way of bringing nation together to face tragic loss of Aus lives
-‐ Dignified rhetoric present Aus in pos international light, offering support &
praise not condemnation
-‐ Media attention v. positive, representing Aus as a nation that handled event in
stately manner
-‐ Finely nuanced & attuned speech, reflecting the true emotions & feelings of grief
felt by the relatives

Anwar Sadat, President of Egypt “Statement to the
Knesset”
Statement to the Knesset (Israeli Parliament) in Jerusalem on 20th November 1977
CONTEXT & PURPOSE
-‐ 1st Arab leader to visit a Jewish state-‐ against the advice of his fellow Arab
nation-‐ & formally recog Israel as a country
-‐ Cycles of conflict betw Israel & Egypt; 4 wars 30yr period & continuous
terrorism enemy statesman
-‐ 1973 Yom Kippur War reversed Israeli perceptions of Egyptian military as
incompetent Sadat negotiating from position of strength.
-‐ Egypt’s military spending rep 28% national budget; greatly impoverished &
overpopulated. Future conflict destitute the Egyptian nation practical
solution
-‐ Atmosphere of wariness & diplomatic stagnation, yet vision & determination to
orchestrate necessary change in thinking & approach to break political stalemate
by non-‐trad means “a sacred mission”
-‐ Proclaims his passion describing “my readiness to go to the farthest corner of the
world” hyperbole
HSC STUDY BUDDY 2
9
-‐
Dignitaries who visit foreign countries observe decorum by modifying aspects of
speech to fit behavioural & social codes of that country.
-‐ “I come to you today on solid ground to shape a new life & to establish peace.”
clear statement of purpose followed by declaring shock & amazement greeting
announcement of his overture of peace
-‐ “My decision” sincere & not merely diplomatic “verbal juggling” or “political
tactics.”
-‐ Aim pragmatic, to “go to the end of the world; I will go to Israel.”
-‐ Pride in actions which astounded those who conceived it impossible for
President “to go to the land of the adversary while we were still in a state of
war.” Shock value partly why such diplomatic impact
-‐ Many in own gov suspicious about his motives & bitterly objected.
-‐ Sadat “knowing that it constitutes a great risk” but goal warrants the threat w/
“main duty” “to exhaust all & every means in a bid to save my Egyptian people &
the entire Arab Nation the horrors of new shocking & destructive wars.”
-‐ Landmark change of course needed “a bold drive towards new horizons.” Posits
idea that respective polit reps must “have the courage to take fate-‐determining
decisions” & “rise above all forms of fanaticism, self-‐deception & obsolete
theories of superiority.” Bold & inspirational words urging wisdom, diplomacy &
humanity
-‐ Speaks in universal terms “Any life lost in war is a human life, irrespective of its
being that of an Israeli or an Arab.” Humanist terms-‐ mankind’s shared concern
for “sons & brothers”
-‐ Politics of reconciliation req open & frank dialogue. Forthrightness, truthfulness,
openness
-‐ “This historic meeting” inference clear “permanent” peace not merely temporary
ceasefire
-‐ Goal to broker “peace based on justice in the entire region.” Only be achieved via
a “radical solution.”
-‐ Past rejection replaced w/ recog & mutual respect, & ack that “we accept to live
you” coz “As we really & truly seek peace, we really & truly welcome you to live
among us in peace & security.” Inclusion rather than hostile exclusion
-‐ Idealism underscore tone of speech but Sadat remained bluntly realistic
-‐ Peace “a giant struggle” rather than a “game;” stresses enormity through
reference “sacred mission”
-‐ Imagery: “bewailing mother,” “widowed wife” & orphaned “innocent children” as
“victims of wars.”
-‐ “Peace based on justice-‐ peace that is not shaken by storms, swayed by suspicion,
or jeopardised by ill intentions” alliteration
CONSTRUCTION
-‐ Begins est religious context “In the name of God, the Gracious & Merciful”
-‐ Purpose bluntly stated “I come to you today...to establish peace”
Page 29 of 37
-‐
Voices that Muslim, Christian & Jew are united by fact all “worship God & no one
but God” focused on what unites them, their humanity & faith
-‐ Ack psychological barrier/wall must destroy. Attempt find middle ground
-‐ Return to ethos is a leitmotif of speech & necessarily so given Sadat’s presence in
Israel was extraordinary at time for Arab leader. E.g. defines Egypt’s position as
one of strength to rule interpretation of his presence as “pleading for peace” out
-‐ 1st person maintains attention on him as peacemaker; gains authority asserting
sincerity & that trip was “my decision,” “I have declared...I will go to Israel”
forthright tone enhances statesmanlike status
-‐ Kinaesthetic imagery “All the facts surging in me” convey Sadat’s passion
-‐ Cites irony of situation “wars launched by man to annihilate his fellow man.”
Outcome “the only vanquished remains man” suggests futility of war;
pointlessness
-‐ Participatory terms help create a groundswell of support sense of
empowerment
-‐ Moral imperative, “the obligation of responsibility” demands the audience give
him a fair hearing
-‐ Uses anaphor “for the sake of” & “For” to pt to numerous beneficiaries of peace.
Subsequent cumulation-‐ inc mention of “our sons & brothers” & “a smile on the
face of every child”-‐ appeals to pathos, allowing audience to glean the upmost
value & importance of peace. Guilt=means of persuasion, appeals to audience’s
sense of wrongdoing.
-‐ By calling on the mercy of God to support his peace mission, appeals to a high
authority recog by both sides. Explicit reference to relig figures worshiped by
both faiths e.g. Abraham & Moses. Emphasises relig unity; stressing common
ground of Christianity, Judaism & Islam
-‐ Appeal to logos through syllogistic reasoning: all 3 religions worship God; God’s
“commandments are love, sincerity, purity & peace” therefore if 1st premise
holds true that “we all...worship God,” then in follows that must follow these
commandments & seek peace.
-‐ Argument predicated on question “how can we achieve permanent peace based
on justice?”
-‐ “answer is not difficult” (dignified response for human beings)
-‐ Admits reality that Israelis were rejected & ostracised to enforce need for new
reality of inclusion: Dirimens Copulatio
-‐ Pts to visit coinciding w/ the “holy Feast of Bourban Bairam” which has as its
central protagonist “Abraham, great-‐grandfather of the Arabs & Jews.”
Reference to historical root of 2 religs pts by implication to idea of unity
-‐ Anaphora “barrier of suspicion...barrier of rejection; a barrier of fear, of
deception, a barrier of hallucination...a barrier of distorted interpretation of
every event & statement”
-‐ Anaphora “let us be frank with each other” reiterates essentiality of
straightforwardness to reconciliation
HSC STUDY BUDDY 3
1
-‐ Metaphoric “fill the earth & space with recitals of peace...Turn the song into a
reality that blossoms & lives” imperative for change/challenge
RECEPTION Contextually momentous declaration of recognition for Israel
-‐ Mission hailed by polit commentators as being “historic” in terms of courage &
decisiveness shown by Egyptian President when existed 30 yr period of
intermittent wars
-‐ Public declaration displayed great statesmanship & statement “we welcome you
among us with full security & safety” initiated a spate of decision making
transforming Middle East polit landscape; Peace efforts became a watershed of
changed relationships in the region
-‐ Radical Palestinian elements denounced Sadat’s efforts to make peace w/ Israel
as an act of treachery
-‐ Universal element “the call for permanent & just peace...has now become the
call of the whole world”
-‐ Not everyone supported his diplomacy, violent opposition existed; isolated &
snubbed in Arab world
-‐ Work in laying a foundation for future peace betw Egypt & Israel Nobel Peace
Prize for 1978
-‐ Trip to Israel stunned the international community-‐ presence in Israel breaks
1948 policy of not dealing publicly w/ the Jewish state
-‐ Speech, partic formal recog of Israel & resultant Egyptian-‐Israeli Peace Treaty
1979 broke ranks w/ rest of Arab League in doing so, alienated from Arab
world (Egypt expelled from Arab League 1979). Still, garnered him much praise
from Western Media, whilst placing Sadat in a tenuous position in his own
country ultimately ending in his assassination by militants in 1981
CONNECTIONS
-‐ Pearson & Sadat: Both speakers discuss similar issues that they feel passionate
about (unity, justice, equality, responsibility) & how they relate to their
communities/contexts. Common aspect of trying to encapsulate peace & justice
& both interested in recontextualising the conditions & acknowledgment in
which their community/people are receiving
-‐ Sadat & Kyi: similar values (peace, tolerance) & purpose involves underlying
political agenda

Similarity between Keating and Pearson Speech

Similarities Differences Intertextuality
Both call/hope for an “opening of NP relate dichotomy of past; whilst NP praises progress being
hearts” for progress PK advocates a collective history & made towards “a new
-‐ PK glorification of unification, absorbing Aboriginals Australian history” which
Anzac & Australian values into wider populace tells “the story of the other
-‐ NP overcome side of the frontier”.
inequalities of past & build Dominating history at time=
that of predominantly white
Page 31 of 37
future founded on justice Aus e.g. Anzacs
& equality w/out assigning Reminds Aus they readily
guilt (harmonious vision “celebrate & share in the
of reconciliation) achievements of the past”
PK speech revolves around national NP delib appeal to intellect of should similarly “feel
identity audience rather than emotions responsibility for & express
NP attempts to relate implication through language & structure of shame in other aspects of
for achieving unified national discussion. their past”
identity “It seems to me that the PK relies of diction which pride & commemoration
psychological unity of this country awakens/dictates audience’s for heroic Anzacs cannot
depends upon our taking emotions to give impetus to the exist alongside “Great
responsibility for the future by conveyance of his challenge Australian Silence”
dealing with the past.” rejects that guilt need “be
Both have notions of war PKs speaking more nationalistic an ingredient” in a national
PK futile but great gains appeal due to accessibility of diction “consideration of our
NP “colonial frontier” inc account whereas NP v academic in parts & history” but argues vs.
William Cooper, ‘protector’ utilises lots of long quotations ignorance & hypocritical
(policeman) shot 31 people coz a considered dull; appeal limited to selection of which parts of
native reputedly killed a while man, academic audience with background history are recognised
claimed “Justice of the Peace” knowledge (such knowledge of
realities of war give platform from Keating’s speech enshrined from
which more openly advocate need young age)
for peace/reconciliation
Both host idea peace beneficial but PK address to Australia as a whole
struggle to achieve whilst NP at times distinguishes
between Indig + European Aus
through repetition of ‘you.’
Inclusivity also woven into speech
PK speech widely accepted coz
idealistic encompasses all in positive
air whereas NP maligned reception:
issue of contentious debate which
tended to marginalise/oppress
ESSAY 1 For Speeches

Through their portrayal of human experience, the speeches you have studied reinforce
the significance of justice.
To what extent does your interpretation of these speeches support this view?
In your response, make detailed reference to at least TWO speeches set for study.

An Australian History for us all by Noel Pearson and Faith, Hope and Reconciliation by
Faith Bandler, in portraying the human experience effectively convey the significance of
justice. The construction, content and language of the speeches exert a unity and
coherence in purpose as to forcefully challenge the audience to consider this concept.
Subsequently, an articulation of a multifaceted personal understanding of justice
derives from the enduring value of Pearson and Bandler’s speeches and their resonance
within a range of contexts. This unity and integration of justice throughout both An
HSC STUDY BUDDY 3
3
Australian History for us all and Faith, Hope and Reconciliation ensure, to a large extent,
that the concept is shown to be significant and intrinsic to human experience.
A central tenet of Pearson and Bandler’s speeches is the need for reconciliation
in order to right past injustices to Australia’s indigenous population. Responding to the
topicality of Indigenous issues brought about by Howard’s politicisation of the ‘black
armband’ view of history, Pearson (in 1996) advocated the need for reconciliation to
right past injustices. Pearson sheds light on past injustices towards Indigenous
Australians through emotive diction connotative of dehumanisation, “the myth of terra
nullius” and “the legal invisibility of the Aboriginal people.” He argues justice’s derivation
from Australians “opening our hearts” to achieve reconciliation, “ungrudgingly” and
through showing respect. The inclusivity of this language compounds the significance of
justice for varying contexts specifically considering the ongoing topicality of Indigenous
issues. With similar contextual influences, Bandler relates the process of reconciliation
as opposed to Pearson’s portrayal of its history. Bandler, in a similar manner to Pearson,
portrays reconciliation as a matter of showing humanity and morality to achieve a just
future. Bandler uses sight imagery, “the willing ignorance and blindness to other
people’s way of life,” to communicate the absence of equality in Australian society. She
juxtaposes these “deliberately blinkered” people with the just and moral approach of
those who are “decent” and “fair-‐minded.” Consequently, Bandler recognises the
procurement of justice is a “hard and slow process” and challenges people to consider
reconciliation through inference, “there’s a fair bit to do about it.” Through portraying
the plight for reconciliation of Indigenous Australians, injustice and justice are heavily
contrasted as to propagate the importance of the latter to human experience.
The textual integrity of Pearson and Bandler’s speeches is shown through the
exploration of justice by means of omission and inference in what is more so a
discussion of naiveté and inhumanity. Valuable to modern context that perceive
Howard’s notoriety in not apologising to the Stolen Generations, Pearson colloquially
accuses Howard of “indulging in agonising navel-‐gazing” to convey his politicisation of
the reconciliation issue. Pearson’s quoting of Howard’s melodramatic argument,
characterised by repetition of “racist, bigoted history,” attempts to convey the past
Prime Minister’s injustice in massaging the majority in an issue of “great electoral
resonance.” Pearson also criticises, through use of colloquialism, the “brain-‐damaged
dialogue” of the media who wrongfully condemned reconciliation in articles that were
poorly researched and made “carefully crafted” use of “tabloid-‐style slogans.” Despite
her guarded diction, “the terrible indignities” and “disagreeable habits,” as to avoid
polarising her audience, in a similar manner to Pearson, Bandler conveys the
significance of justice in conveying the inhumanity of those who are disinterested in
reconciliation. Bandler’s use of rhetorical question, “why in the name of creation our
differences should matter? Why is it so hard to find our commonalities?” argues equality
as what is natural for dignified human beings. Bandler’s ideas are widely valued as
shown by repetition of “millions” which emphasises that prejudice is a universal
problem and the prime barrier to justice is dealing with human nature itself. As it is,
Pearson and Bandler compound the inherent significance of justice is portraying the
Page 33 of 37
inhumanity and naiveté of those who do not want or perceive the need for
reconciliation.
Perhaps the most stringent manipulation of human experience to convey the
importance of justice is the challenge for change inherent in both speeches. Pearson
uses an allusion to the Holocaust to lend seriousness to the reconciliation issue and
emphasise the imperative for change. Nevertheless, through metaphor, “[history
shouldn’t be reduced] to a shallow field of point scoring,” Pearson highlights that to
respond to the past, justice needs to be achieved in future issues for unification to
occur. The inclusive language in Pearson refute of Dr Hewson’s comments, “the
psychological unity of this country depends upon our taking responsibility for the future
by dealing with the past,” propagate a challenge to his audience (contextual and
modern) to aim towards reconciliation through respect and acknowledgement. The
textual integrity of An Australian History for us all is seen in Pearson’s layering and
building of arguments using quotes, which lend the speech historical veracity and
authority, effectively augmenting the significance of justice. Contrasting Pearson’s
intellectual argument, Bandler presents her challenge subjectively, portraying her hope
in the general populace through tautology, “My belief is in people. I fix my faith in
people. I’m a great believer in the power of people.” Inclusive language allows Bandler to
directly challenge her audience seen in her argument of reconciliation being about
“working together” to lighten “the burden of that terrible baggage that has to do with
our differences.” Concluding her speech, Bandler argues reconciliation as a national
imperative through use of rhetorical question, “If not now, when? If not us, who?”
Owing to Bandler being a seasoned campaigner, as well as the inherent honesty and
emotional attachment in her speech, the speech exudes textual integrity, enabling it to
galvanise flagging spirits and give impetus to some Australians to be actively involved in
campaign.
In conclusion, Pearson and Bandler’s speeches, as a result of their textual
integrity, strongly support the hypothesis that their portrayal of human experience
reinforces the significance of justice. Both An Australian History for us all and Faith,
Hope and Reconciliation coherently use form and language to integrate justice
throughout their speeches. The subsequent depth and latent power of both speeches
provide for the communication of this to various audiences with different attitudes,
values and beliefs. Effectively, the wide-‐ranging resonance of the concept of justice
engenders its significance as a portrayal of the human experience which may be
received, evaluated, understood and valued in a plethora of contexts.

ESSAY 2 For Speeches

Through their portrayal of human experience, the speeches you have studies challenge
prevailing social and cultural attitudes, values and beliefs. To what extent does your
interpretation of these speeches support this view? Make detailed references to two
speeches set for study.

HSC STUDY BUDDY 3
5
The latent power inherent in the spoken word ensures that speeches, both implicitly
and explicitly, challenge predominant social and cultural attitudes, values and beliefs.
Both Noel Pearson’s 1996 “An Australian History for us all,” and Anwar Sadat’s 1977
“Statement to the Knesset,” shape profound calls to action owing to their employment
of distinctive rhetorical devices, coherent and logical construction and universally
challenging ideas. This textual integrity of Pearson and Sadat’s speeches assures their
re-‐evaluation of social and cultural attitudes towards reconciliation as well as their
reiteration of the importance of peace and justice, offer imperatives for change which
endure varying contexts.
Forefront to Pearson’s re-‐articulation of Australia’s colonial history is the
impetus given for a re-‐assessment of the apprehension commonly surrounding
Indigenous issues. Pearson impugns the politically-‐oriented conception of Australia’s
“black armband” history through explicitly referencing authorities, experts and historical
figures asserting his rhetoric’s appropriateness, and thus value, to his academic,
intellectual audience. Pearson dexterously uses inclusive language in “the psychological
unity of this country depends upon our taking responsibility for the future by dealing
with the past” contradicting accost Dr. Hewson’s widely acknowledged attitude that
Australians do not need to feel responsibility for the past. Using the metaphor that
history need not “be reduced to a shallow field of point scoring,” Pearson effectively
integrates his central theme throughout his speech that guilt is not a constructive
emotion, hence asserting his speech’s nature as a coherent whole. Conveying his
passion in upholding reconciliation, Pearson implicitly purports the need for attitudes to
reconciliation to become more dignified and just. Sensitive to kairos, he recognises the
topicality and controversy over Indigenous issues, labelling reconciliation through cliché
as a “hot button issue” with “great electoral resonance” to agitate the politicisation of
the situation, and subsequently, by omission, call for a pragmatic approach.
Conclusively, in portraying the plight for reconciliation, Pearson forcefully impugns
operative misadvised and amoral perspectives of the “guilt issue” rather challenging
more learned attitudes.
Through representing the human experience, Sadat forcefully propositions his
audience to adopt a tolerant attitude towards reconciliation between the Arab and
Israeli worlds. The decorum of Sadat’s rhetoric, that is, the appropriateness of his frank,
idealistic dialogue considering the contextual implication of it being the first time an
Arab leader has visited a Jewish state, ensures its effectiveness in challenging
predominant socio-‐cultural attitudes. Through anaphora of “let us be frank with each
other,” Sadat fosters the need to retire animosities instead reiterating the essentiality of
straightforwardness to reconciliation. Sadat proclaims his passion for reconciliation
whilst inferring the immensity of the problem through hyperbole in stating his
“readiness to go to the farthest corner of the world.” Using the emotive imagery of
“innocent children… depressed of the care and compassion of their parents” followed by
the connotations of responsibility imbued in the line “for the sake of them all,” Sadat
demands a re-‐assessment of ignorant attitudes towards the ongoing Arab-‐Israeli
conflict. Inevitably, Sadat’s establishment of the need for Arab-‐Israeli tolerance is
Page 35 of 37
inherently valuable by reason of the textual integrity of the speech, notably Sadat’s
authority and statesmanship seen in his use of the forthright tone of “my decision” and
“I have declared…I will go to Israel.” To a great extent then, both Sadat and Pearson,
through apt manipulation of rhetoric, offer audacious imperatives for a re-‐evaluation of
prevalent narrow-‐minded socio-‐cultural attitudes towards reconciliation.
In a like manner, Pearson cogently asserts the extensive value of peace and
justice as opposed to fallible beliefs in the inferiority of Indigenous Australians and
established values of irresponsibility and naiveté. Through metaphorically proposing
that guilt need not “be an ingredient” in a national “reconsideration of our history,”
Pearson proposes that reconciliation values peaceful, non-‐divisive foundations. Still,
Pearson impugns prejudiced values imbued in past selective histories, instead advising
that we “feel responsibility for and express shame in relation to other aspects of the
past.” Ensuring the continued value of his rhetoric given its distinctive construction on
layered academic and historic references, Pearson argues that, what Professor Stanner
labels the “Great Australian Silence,” cannot exist alongside the legacies of Kokoda and
Gallipoli, adding authority to this argument through the sarcasm of “Lest we forget.”
Through use of emotive and condemnatory diction including “the myth of terra nullius,”
“legal invisibility” and “a steadfast belief in our humanity,” Pearson holds “White”
presumptions of their superiority over Indigenous Australians as naive and largely
inhumane. To a large degree, in soliciting an “opening [of] our hearts,” Pearson appeals
to his audience’s sympathy and dignity to elicit a response that they take responsibility
for the past and hence balance the oppression created by such previous dehumanising
beliefs. In encapsulating universal principles of justice and reconciliation, Pearson’s
rhetoric is inherently valued as a platform for international audiences to recontextualise
and confront past injustices, specifically those caused by prejudices and fallacious
beliefs.
In his valiant address regarding the diplomatic stagnation resulting from a 30year
period of intermittent wars, Sadat strenuously counsels the development of Arab-‐Israeli
relations founded on the values of peace and justice. Asserting the nature of his rhetoric
as a portrayal of the human experience with emphasis on challenging established values
and beliefs, Sadat metaphorically infers the absence of peace and justice through
proposing the need for “a radical solution” constituting “a bold drive to new horizons.”
Sadat shrewdly uses hypophora, predicating his argument on the question “how can we
achieve permanent peace based on justice?” then stating “the answer is not difficult” to
suggest the immense significance of peace, which is a value necessitated by humans for
dignified response to conflicts. Sadat upholds the value of justice in diplomatically
sanctioning the resolution for Arab-‐Israeli conflict as being the establishment of an
equitable and trusting relationship, conveyed through the repetitive and participatory
nature of “As we really and truly seek peace, we really and truly welcome you to live
among us in peace and security.” Sadat demands his audience embrace peace through
the use of metaphor in “fill the earth and space with recitals of peace... turn the song
into a reality that blossoms and lives” to shape a harmonious ambience as to establish
the value’s upmost benefit to humanity. The immensity of Sadat’s imperative for the
procurement of peace based on justice, conveyed through the speech’s construction on
HSC STUDY BUDDY 3
7
humanist tenets such as “Any life lost in war is a human life” and the description of a
just peace as “the call of the whole world,” is manifested in its ability to be universally
valued. From the outset then, Sadat’s speech elicits an emotional and intellectual
response from his audience in fostering a reorientation of apprehensive beliefs
operative in the Arab-‐Israeli world, instead proposing the importance of the values of
peace and justice.
In conclusion, despite the plethora of interpretations Pearson and Sadat’s
speeches allow as a result of their textual integrity, An Australian History for us all and
Statement to the Knesset are substantially recognisable as imperatives for a re-‐
assessment of social and cultural attitudes, values and beliefs. Ultimately, this latent
power inherent in both Pearson and Sadat’s rhetoric to elicit a response from original to
modern audiences is rooted in their employment of distinctive rhetorical devices,
shrewd construction and universally challenging ideas. It is the interrelation of these
elements of both speeches that ensures their capacity to forcefully challenge blinkered
and apprehensive attitudes to reconciliation of their respective societies whilst
simultaneously upholding the values and benefits of peace and justice over conflict and
argument.

Page 37 of 37

Adv English Critical Study of Texts Speeches PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adv English Critical Study of Texts Speeches PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HSC

CONTENTS PAGE: CRITICAL STUDY OF TEXTS

language uniﬁed structure/

Intertextual Anaphoric-‐ Cataphoric-‐

o Encompasses ideas & values intrinsically Australian

ESSAY 1 For Speeches

You might also like

Adv English Critical Study of Texts Speeches PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adv English Critical Study of Texts Speeches PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HSC

CONTENTS PAGE: CRITICAL STUDY OF TEXTS

language uniﬁed structure/

Intertextual Anaphoric-­‐ Cataphoric-­‐

o Encompasses ideas & values intrinsically Australian

ESSAY 1 For Speeches

You might also like

Intertextual Anaphoric-‐ Cataphoric-‐