Well, as an addendum to the previous post regarding Obama vs Howard, I thought I'd mention that my ears pricked up at a curious sound today. If I'm not mistaken, it was the sound of a modicum of rhetorical flair rearing its head in Australian politics.
Fancy my surprise when, listening to the news on the ABC website, I heard the following from Kevin Rudd (verbatim, my transcript):
"To accuse the Democratic Party of the United States, as being Al Qaeda’s party of choice; to accuse the Democratic Party as being the terrorist’s party of choice - this is a most serious charge. To accuse the party of Roosevelt; to accuse the party of Truman; to accuse the party of Kennedy and Johnson, of being the terrorist’s party of choice.
I cannot understand how any responsible leader of this country can say to the nation that it is his serious view that the Democratic Party of the United States is the terrorist’s party of choice, but these are your words Prime Minister. "
____________
Clearly, the speechwriter knows what he/she is doing, employing two of the oldest tricks in the book: anaphora, the repetition of a phrase ('to accuse') at the commencement of successive clauses; and anadiplosis, the repetition of a phrase ('terorist's party of choice') at the end of successive clauses.
Many great speeches use such classical techniques, not least of all MLK's 'I have a dream' and JFK's Civil Rights address. The winds of change...?
No comments:
Post a Comment