Conflicting perspectives offers multiple angles on an event, situation or personality from which an individual may construct their own meaning from. Good morning teachers and students. Today I will be discussing how Intense opinions and contrasting views are presented in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, The President's Address to the Nation by George Bush and “Against Going to War with Iraq” a speech by Barack Obama as a senator. These texts use a range of language forms and features to manipulate their audience unique to their medium of production, purpose and audience
I would like to focus firstly on the funeral oration of Julius Caesar where Brutus uses logos and ethos to justify the assassination of Caesar “As he was valiant, I honour him. But, as he was ambitious, I slew him.” The use of taxis creates a facade of a logical argument and by which Brutus controls the audience’s response through the juxtaposition. Brutus also uses rhetorical questions inconjuction with symploce to manipulate the audience in giving a desired response “Who is here so vile that will not love his country? If any, speak—for him have I offended”. The effectiveness of his argument is shown in the plebeian’s response “Live Brutus! Live! Live!” By contrast, Mark Antony uses Pathos extensively because his purpose is to manipulate the plebeian’s emotions to an extent where this would spark a mutiny. Antony provides anecdotal evidence of the generous qualities of Caesar. “He hath brought many captives home to Rome whose ransoms did the general coffers fill.” Coupled with rhetorical questions “Did this in Caesar seem ambitious? Through the rhetorical question he generates provocative insights into his perspective on the nature of Caesar. Through Antony’s repetition of the phrase” Brutus says he was ambitious and Brutus is an honourable man” inconjuction with the evidence he provides, the plebeians are provoked to doubt and question Brutus’s honour and justification for...