On April 12th, 1999, Elie Wiesel, Nobel Peace Prize winner and Holocaust survivor, delivered his “The Perils of Indifference” speech that contributed to the “Millennium Lecture series” hosted by leaders of the White House in Washington D.C. Going into detail about how “indifference” had left severe impact on the world, especially during critical times such as the two world wars and several civil wars, the dedicate activist attempted to inform his officials audience about the heavy cost of turning away as well as to persuade the political crews out of such “inhuman” actions.
Throughout the speech, Weisel employed pathos to the fullest extent by means of subjective experiences, relational scenarios, powerful diction, irony, and rhetorical questions.
At the beginning of his speech, the peace devotee took himself as the specific instance by telling a short narrative about how his young Jewish self went through the war with mental scars that remained to never heal. Since it was rooted from Weisel’s own experience, the story appeared more credible to the higher-up audience as he described his emotions vividly without fearing to leave disingenuous impression. Words that
…show more content…
evoked strong sentiments such as “liberated”, “rage”, “grateful” were also blended opportunely into the context and hence, made the flow become more natural and elicit greater sentiments. Particulate states of innocent people involved in the war such as the “Muselmanner” prisoners, the “Jews” in Auschwitz, Treblinka and those who were turned away from the United States when escaping from the Nazi Germany, additionally, enhanced the Holocaust survivor’s influence on the White House leaders’ emotions. Tangibly aiding the description of such cases, potent diction came into use: supposedly normal nouns such as “gates”, “tale”, “wire” were transformed into lively images by being supplemented with an adjective: “black gates”, “depressing tale”, “barbed wire”, which triggered the audience’s feelings of horror and pain. Another feature that helped build Weisel’s pathos was the prevalent use of irony throughout his speech. Some of the salient examples are found in contrasting pairs such as “finally free” and “no joy”, “dead” and “did not know” that they were dead, “leaders of the free world” and “no knowledge of the war against the Jews”. These clear paradoxes, hence, could initiate distinct emotional responses from the listeners: from sympathy, pity to anger, which in turn empower the peace activist’s talk in its capacity to capture attention and vicariously give its message of saying “no” to “indifference”. Comparable to how inquiries can stimulate imagination and memory, rhetorical questions, as a literary technique, was shown to leave a significant impact on the way people feel and think. In Weisel’s speech particularly, he paid extra careful notice to setting out questions that encourage leaders of the White House to reflect on ways human’s “indifference” had cost the world. Issues such as “What will the legacy of this vanishing century be? How will it be remembered in the new millennium?” or “Is it necessary at times to practice it simply to keep one’s sanity, live normally, enjoy a fine meal and a glass of wine as the world around us experiences harrowing upheavals?” presented sometimes with an immediate answer, and sometimes not, helped significantly in directing listeners to the point Weisel intended to make. These rhetorical questions, furthermore, could accompany officials audience with ready acceptance and possible realization of upcoming ideas or messages, for vulnerable states usually fall in cases where sentiment dominates rationality. (cite psy, phil source) Accomplishing such a goal, however, requires an application of vigorous diction, which Weisel’s speech adroitly employed: “inescapable consequences”, “conceivable”, “justified intervention”, “terrorization”, etc. Pathos, while being heavily relied on, was not the single factor contributing to the Nobel Peace prize winner’s “The Perils of Indifference” speech before the White House. Ethos, in fact, also proved to be one of the main facets Weisel focused on to add credibility to his talk. To build strong trust and connection from his audience, he had evidently illustrated essential characters, core relation, influential authority, and long-lived reputation. Honesty and thoughtfulness were two major traits the Holocaust survivor demonstrated throughout the speech. By telling his personal story, pointing out President Franklin Roosevelt’s mistake and reminding the White House’s officials the pain their people had undertook during the war, Weisel came across as a genuine and candid person who was not afraid to face and help other people face reality, regardless of how cruel it was. Phrases such as “I must say it”, or “I don’t understand” accordingly promoted sincerity in the way he delivered the speech. Thoughtfulness, another important character Weisel showed, came into context naturally as he raised questions regarding the future of the world at the “threshold of a new century”, displayed concern about how “indifference” had affected human heavily and indicated that people thus ought to learn from the past, choose care instead of indifference. Powerful adjectives as well as verbs from “profound and abiding gratitude”, “feared”, “forgotten”, to “relieve”, “understood”, “broken heart” were also used to manifest Weisel’s attentiveness to the issues he addressed. Via these moral characters, the peace activist appeared more trustworthy to the audience, critical leaders of the United States, and hence, established reliability to his speech. On top of creating a suitable integrity, making connections with the listeners, especially with dubious or cautious ones, remained one of Weisel’s talk strong points. Numerous instances from the past wars, which some may experience either directly or vicariously through media means and others around, were employed to the greatest extent as the Holocaust survivor described every incident with detail and in descriptive language. Pain and regret stayed as the main emotions Weisel injected and subsequently connected to his audience, making them actualize the scenarios in their position. In addition, near the end of his speech, Weisel also mentioned the future of children, the next generation, and united himself with the rest of listeners, both parents and those concerned with delicate beings that are about to grow up. Making use of these links, thus, helped strengthen the peace activist’s conviction capacity with every point he made. Fifteen years old when experiencing the war at first hand, Weisel appeared as a solid evidence that retained officials’s trust during the speech. His reputation as a famous journalist, Chairman of the President's Commission on the Holocaust, and human rights activist accumulated pre-credibility from listeners, especially guarded ones. Without stopping short, however, Weisel also made use of well-known figures and incidents such as “Gandhi, the Kennedys, Martin Luther King, Sadat, Rabin”, “bloodbaths in Cambodia and Nigeria, India and Pakistan, Ireland and Rwanda, Eritrea and Ethiopia, Sarajevo and Kosovo; the inhumanity in the gulag and the tragedy of Hiroshima”, “Muselmanner” prisoners, Auschwitz and Treblinka “secrets”, etc to develop confidence and foundation for his main ideas. Last but not least, while the application of pathos and ethos dominated the talk as a mean to capture attention and constitute conviction, Weisel did not forget to employ logos, or logic in the flow of his speech.
By giving examples of what negative impact “indifference”, specifically in the war, had left on human, the Holocaust survivor slowly directed leaders of the “free country” to a palpable self-conclusion of how to adjust their behavior so that looking away is not an option. Not only the big picture remained at logos’ control, however, small points were firmly advocated as well. For instance, when Weisel claimed that “indifference” was “more dangerous than anger and hatred”, appropriate reasons were given as to why he made such an assertion, which hence reduced critical audience’s
skepticism. Combining skillful techniques to express pathos, ethos and logos in his “The Perils of Indifference” speech, Weisel attempted to address how past mistake of turning one back on his or her fellow human had left tragic results and implied cautious avoidance. As a rhetorical piece, thus, Weisel’s speech may be taken as a model for other orations that aim to seize trust, credibility and absorption.
Elie Wiesel’s speech, Hope Despair and Memory gave in 1986 mainly focused on the great importance of remembering past memories that people tend to want to forget. The speech was very successful in persuading the audience to believe in the importance that memory serves us through the great use of pathos throughout the speech, especially the pathos that always comes from any sort of holocaust recollection. Elie uses such sentences as, “a young man struggles to readjust to life. His mother, his father, his small sister are gone. He is alone. On the verge of despair.”(Abrams, 1997) He helps to arise a strong sense of sympathy from the injustices that had plagued this time in history. This use of pathos makes it an effective use of it for it underlines the audience’s attention towards Elie Wiesel and makes them closer to his emotions an...
He says, “These failures have cast a dark shadow over humanity: two World Wars, countless civil wars, the senseless chain of assassinations,... so much violence; so much indifference.” (4). Indifference is shown by not only the people involved in these violent events, but also Wiesel’s audience as well, many clueless of these events. For one to fail to know and understand these events in order to stop and bring awareness to them is just as wrong as committing the event in the first place, according to Wiesel. One must also believe the event itself to escape the corruptive qualities of indifference. During the Holocaust, many did not believe what was happening and chose to then ignore it rather than do anything about it. The unaware audience and people in the 1940s thoroughly proves the corrosiveness of
Speeches are given for a purpose. Whether it is for persuasion, or education, or even entertainment, they all target certain parts of people’s minds. This speech, The Perils of Indifference, was given by Elie Wiesel with intention to persuade his audience that indifference is the downfall of humanity, and also to educate his audience about his conclusions about the Holocaust and the corresponding events. He was very successful in achieving those goals. Not only was the audience enlightened, but also President Bill Clinton, and the First Lady, Hillary Clinton, themselves were deeply touched by Wiesel’s words.
Elizer’s personal account of the holocaust does not merely highlight the facts of the holocaust: millions suffered and the event was politically and religiously motivated, but provides an in depth investigation to what a person endured mentally, physically, and emotionally. Beginning as a teenager, Elizer thought highly of God and of his own beliefs, however, that quickly diminished when he was put into a system of sorting and killing people. During the holocaust, Elizer was not the only person to change; almost everyone suffered and changed differently. The stressful and harsh times affected Elizer just as they affected the person working next to him in the factory. Elizer quickly began to question everything “I pinched myself: Was I still alive? Was I awake? How was it possible that men, women, and children were being burned and that the world kept silent?” (Wiesel 32). Although Elizer forms this mentality, he also finds the will to survive, to protect his father, and to not turn into the people that were aro...
In Elie Wiesel’s speech “Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech”, Wiesel suggests that in times of crisis, people must stand together against injustices. Wiesel develops and supports his claim through his use of anecdotes, inclusive diction, rhetorical questions, and parallel structures. Wiesel’s purpose is to motivate the world to stand up against injustices in order to prevent the persecution of more innocent people. The audience Wiesel intended for his speech is anyone on Earth who is willing to make a difference, but mostly directed at adults who are able to go out and actually contribute to making a change. Wiesel succeeds in establishing a bond with the audience, as he comes off as very humble and trustworthy. Through his use of rhetorical
In the eyes of Elie Wiesel, author of Night, indifference whether it be in relationship abuse or another problem, is mentally damaging and needs to be eliminated. In his memoir, Night, Elie Wiesel illustrates how indifference can harm the mind of the victim when he says, “Never shall I forget the nocturnal silence that deprived me for all eternity of the desire to live,” (Night 34). In this, Wiesel is speaking of his first night in Auschwitz. When he mentions silence he is referring to the indifference that the Jews in concentration camps faced from the rest of the world. Wiesel refers to that night as the time he lost his desire to live because he saw so much indifference toward the suffering of the inmates and the horrific things that were happening to them. After this, his desire to stay alive was destroyed because he watched as the world stood by, indifferent to the senseless murder of millions. Throught this, Wiesel illustrates that indifference will impact people for the rest of their lives. Because indifference
Though his experiences in the concentration camps, Elie Wiesel has developed the belief that everyone should be an upstander and not stand silently as people are hurt. This can be seen in his Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance speech years after the end of the Holocaust and the publishing of Night, “that the world did know and
On 12 April 1999, Elie Wiesel gave a provocative and thought provoking speech, The Perils of Indifference, at the Millennium Lecture series that were held at the White House in Washington D.C. The goal of Wiesel’s speech was to open the audience’s eyes to the harmful effects of indifference to a suffering population, as well as to contemplate how not to let those types of atrocities happen in the new millennium. Wiesel’s dramatic account as a holocaust survivor aides in the success of his speech about indifference. “He was finally free, but there was no joy in his heart” (Wiesel, 1999). By utilizing Aristotle’s three appeals, Ethos, Logos, and Pathos, Wiesel created a successful argument against the dangers of indifference.
Indifference is seductive, inhumane, and the line between good and evil. Indifference is helping the enemy, it is death. Writer and Holocaust Survivor, Wiesel Elie in his speech, “The Perils of Indifference”, argues that being indifferent to those who are suffering assists the enemy. He supports his claim by first defining and describing indifference as “seductive”, “tempting”, and “easier.” Wiesel goes on to illustrate the dangers of indifference by using personal experience and historical events as examples. Finally, the author creates awareness of indifference from the past, present, and future. Wiesel’s purpose is to describe why indifference is inhumane in order to persuade people not to be indifferent. He establishes a serious tone, critical, and somber tone for Politicians, Ambassadors, Mr. President, and members of congress.
Many people stay silent in times of dispute because they fear being judged, but in reality staying quiet and not choosing sides will never solve the situation. Elie Wiesel was a devoted Jew who was forced to suffer the horrors of the Holocaust at the young age of 15. After being shipped in cattle cars to many concentration camps, including Auschwitz, Elie began fighting for justice and equality for all people despite income, race, religion, or political views. In his Nobel Prize acceptance speech, Elie Wiesel stresses his claim that silence and neutrality will always benefit the oppressor through the use of logos, ethos, and pathos.
Wiesel endured much horrors in the world and he has worked his entire life to help get rid of hatred and ignorance from the world. “Fifty-four years ago to the day, a young Jewish boy from a small town in the Carpathian Mountains woke up, not far from Goethe's beloved Weimar, in a place of eternal infamy called Buchenwald. He was finally free, but there was no joy in his heart. He thought there never would be again” (Wiesel 310). This quote from Wiesel’s speech is located at the very beginning of his speech because he wants to build credibility with his audience. He is showing that he had first hand experience of being in the Holocaust. It allows the audience to visualize a young Wiesel being part of the Holocaust having dealt with the pain, punishment, and starvation. Wiesel describes himself as a Jewish boy “without joy in his heart” because even though he finally had his freedom, he felt much compassion from the American soldiers. This quote lets the audience know what the speaker went through and how it affected his world view. Elie Wiesel is a good source to hear about indifference towards World War II from because he lived through it. This quote impacts the meaning of the speech because its lets the audience know a little background information on what happened to Wiesel and we know that what he is saying is truthful because he tells us about what he saw, what he was thinking, and
Action is the only remedy to indifference, the most insidious danger of all.” Elie Wiesel asserts that the world community is responsible to interfere when acts such as mass murder or genocide occur. He says that “silence encourages the tormentor” and “indifference is the most insidious danger of all”. One must speak out against oppression so there can be a difference. When one remains silent and doesn’t act, they are encouraging the person responsible for the genocide, not the victim.
In 1999, he was invited to speak at the Millennium Lectures, in front of the president, first lady, and other important governmental figures,. In his speech, “The Perils of Indifference”, he uses rhetorical devices to get emotional responses and to connect with the audience. He wants to create awareness of the dangers of indifference and show how there needs to be change. His speech eloquently calls out the government for their lack of response during the Holocaust, and warns against continued disregard for the struggles of others. He sees indifference as being the ally of the enemy, and without compassion there is no hope for the victims.
“The Perils of Indifference” is a speech that Elie Wiesel delivered in Washington D.C. on April 12, 1999, exactly 54 years after his release from the Nazi concentration camp Buchenwald by American troops. Both Congress along with President Clinton and Mrs. Clinton were present to hear the speech. Wiesel spoke briefly about what it was like in the concentration camps, but he focused mostly on the topic of Indifference. His speech was effective in its use of rhetoric to convince the audience that as individuals and as a world culture we cannot afford to become indifferent to the suffering around us.
Wiesel’s speech, persuasive in nature, was designed to educate his audience as to the violence and killing of innocent people across the globe. Wiesel spoke of acts that had taken place throughout his lifetime, from his youth, up through present day atrocities. His focu...