Keating's Speech Analysis

1320 Words6 Pages
Compare how two speeches position their audience to respond in a particular way to the ideas contained in the speech. A great speech is able to connect with audience whilst compelling audiences to reassess old societal and personal paradigms. Paul Keating’s ‘Funeral service of the unknown Australian soldier’ and Faith Bandler’s ‘Faith, hope and reconciliation’ positions the audience through employing both metatextual and textual elements to affirm with different perspectives in their respective speeches. Keating’s ideal of a cultivated, united Australian identity and Bandler’s ideals of reconciliation appeal to different audiences, yet both speeches appeal to our logical reason and our emotions to draw us into their speech and positions us…show more content…
Keating’s position as the Prime Minister forces him to speak to all Australians. This is vital to Keating’s cultivation of a shared Australian identity. Keating’s exordium employs repetition of inclusive language - ‘we’ - to appeal to a larger audience than Bandler’s use of ‘I’. Unlike Bandler, Keating insists that whilst differences do occur and always has we still share a common Australian identity. This is highlighted with the continuous use of asyndeton breaking down the cultural, social and environmental binaries that everyday Australians face. For example, ‘what religion, if he had a religion, if he was married or single’. The asyndeton employed coupled with the use of the anaphora ‘we do not know’ poses the question to the audience ‘What does it truly mean to be Australian?’ By Keating highlighting the unknown aspects, he entices audiences to mould the Unknown Soldier their will, someone who they can relate to. Keating then places the Unknown Soldier as the centre point through the anaphora of ‘one’ and line ‘he is all of them and one of us.’ This emotional assertion to the audience creates a patriotic sense of belonging to the. Finally the line ‘we have gained a legend, a story of bravery and sacrifice...what it means to be Australian’ appeals to the pathos of the Australian public that they are ‘legendary‘ through the ‘sacrifices’ and their…show more content…
Bandler’s speech exhibits the value of unity through the portrayal of ideals of faith and hope. The title itself is a pun on the Christian virtues of ‘Faith, hope and charity’. The eponymous self-referencing of her own name as well as the implied Christian virtues of faith provokes a unity towards her audience. She proposes there is no current unity in the fight for indigenous justice through the quote ‘module in my thinking’. The negative connotation of ‘module’ implies the division that is present in both her thinking and the fight for reconciliation. Yet for the remainder of her speech she educates her immediate audience to achieve final reconciliation. The zoomorphism of ‘chained in their stubbornness’ connotes the subhuman nature of those who oppose the reconciliation cause and with unity these animals can be defeated. By referencing John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address, she appeals to our sense of responsibility to the state. Bandler replaces the ‘country’ with the first person pronouns ‘me’ and ‘us’. By taking away the institution of the state and emphasising our Australian ‘commonalities she again reinforces that racial justice issues can be resolved if we work together. The use of statistics and factual information on individuals and organisations such Alex Vesper, Ken Brindle and the FCAATSI gives legitimacy to her speech whilst at the same time subtly

More about Keating's Speech Analysis

Open Document