Who is Ned Kelly?

Ned Kelly: hero or villain (800 words)

Moderator: Radio program’s host.

Noah Johnson - Hero, professor for sociology

Jennie - Villain, professor for law

 Panel discussion = discursive writing

 Discussion about whether Ned Kelly is a hero or villain or look at the man, the
legend, the icon and what he represents in the modern Australian psyche
 Persuasive techniques
 Ethos = moral
 Pathos = emotions
 Logos = appealing to logic (statistics, case studies)
 Language
 Informal
 Formal
 Create credibility
High modality = absolutely right

Moderator :
Good evening and welcome to William’s Evening Show! This is William Smith, the host.
Tonight, we have invited two professors from two different fields, and we’ll talk about Ned
Kelly! Ok, this is sociology professor Noah Johnson who believes Ned Kelly is a hero.

Johnson : (nodding)
Moderator :
And, this is law professor Jennie Kim who believes Ned Kelly is a villain.

Kim : (raising hand with smile)

Moderator :
So, tonight’s discussion topic is, “Is Ned Kelly a hero or villain?” To better understand these
discussions, I will briefly introduce Ned Kelly. He was an Australian bushranger, gang leader,
outlaw and best known for Australian icon who wore tin-can and a suit of bulletproof armour
every time.

Moderator :
Now, can I start with professor Johnson please?

Johnson :
Sure. Ned Kelly established the Kelly Gang for fight against the discrimination and help
people. Ned Kelly helped the poor like a battler by robbing money from the rich. For
instance, from Saturday evening on February 6, 1879 until Monday evening on February 10,
1879, the Kelly gang carried out an audacious raid on the town of Jerilderie NSW, robbing
the Bank of New South Wales of 2140 pounds. He was considered as Robin Hood in
Australia by the poor at that time.

Kim :
I agree to some extent that it is a good thing that he helped the poor by handing out money.
But it is hard to answer whether he is a hero or not with that fact because he acted in good
faith with someone else’s money. The fact we can notice is that he committed a crime. He
would have become a hero if he helped the poor fairly with the money he had, but because
he stole other people’s money, he would be nothing but only a thief.

Johnson :
Ned Kelly was a Irish Australian who was a target of class distinction by England protestant.
It is clear that battlers had been discriminated against and treated poorly by authorities. Ned
Kelly, who lost his father at an early age, was at the forefront of this situation, which led him
to fight against the authorities. In the Jerilderie Letter page 35, Ned Kelly mentioned that the
society made him to act violently against the police. “Drive me to do things which I don’t wish
to do without the public assisting them,” shows the tough circumstance put him in the
position of breaking the law.

Kim :

Personally, I think Ned Kelly is a villain and Ned Kelly’s Jerilderie Letter is the evidence. On
page 32, we can find out the evidence of Kelly’s assault on the police, “Some of them going
to the hospital from the effects of hits from the fists of the larrikin”, which illustrates that he
gets upset and fights back the police violently. Even if he's been through an unfair situation,
it can’t be used as an excuse for hitting police. He simply used violence against the police
who performed his duties, which was not only a crime of obstruction of business but also
immoral behaviour.

Johnson :
I don't want to justify the violence, but at that time the Australian society had no mercy for
the less educated poor individuals. Ned Kelly was subjected to numerous discrimination and
violence since he was a child. He had to see not only those uneducated people, including
himself, family, or battlers, suffer. I think violence was his best way to confront the situation.
In the novel, True History of the Kelly Gang by Peter Carey, shows his childhood in
difficulties. After Ned Kelly’s father died, his family went to prison to meet his uncle. And Ned
Kelly had no choice but to see how the police treated his mother and family. Police officers
put a woman with little children outside, and even ate the cake she brought for his uncle. We
can clearly see the treatment for Irish Australian even in this short part of the novel. In fact,
there’s probably much more diiscrimination that we can’t imagine now.

Kim :

I strongly disagree with your opinion. You have said that violence was the best choice for an
uneducated person, Ned Kelly. Even kids know that the violence is bad behaviour. It is really
sad and inevitable if he was in an environment where violence was taught to be justifiable.
But he didn’t. He didn’t grow up in that circumstance and his mother wasn’t even a violent
person. Ned Kelly was a man who could think like normal people. Moreover, I think he
performed violence because he enjoyed the brutality rather than he thought it was his
optimum choice. In the letter, he said he wouldn’t have hit the police if the police let him
alone. However the quote, “ but by the light that shines pegged on an ant bed with their
bellies opened, their fat taken out rendered and poured down their throat boiling hot”, depicts
that he is a psychopath. He acted like he is kind, innocent and only a victim of the
circumstance but that is not true. It is hyperbole and anyone can’t be treated in this violent
way.

Moderator : Alright! Professor Johnson believes Ned Kelly is a hero because he helped the
poor, and the society put him in the position of acting violence. However, professor Kim
believes Ned Kelly is a villain because his behaviour is against the moral of human beings
and laws. This was a brief summary of the discussion and thank you for showing your
opinion. Let’s give claps for our two guests, professor Noah Johnson and professor Jennie
Kim. Don’t forget you can continue the discussion on our home page, William’s Evening
Show!