Trump's speech was much more effective in my mind because he heavily relied on pathos and almost "abused" words for their connotative meanings. He knew his words would develop themselves and linger in the audience's minds. He also used many statistics and percentages, developing his logos. Clinton was more straightforward and her words were direct and denotative. She used ethos to her advantage, citing her experience as a First Lady and Secretary of State. She builds her credibility for the position of President. She had little to no logos and I found her pathos to be weaker than Trump's. Trump's diction incorporated colorful language and he used his experience as a reality television star to his advantage.
Mr. Trump appeals to the citizen that fears an imminent threat and wants action right now. He appeals to fear, which has a more urgent reaction in the mind than the love that Clinton appeals to. Trump's tone is filled with nationalism and he genuinely sounds like he wants to make his country the best. Clinton uses a motherly tone and begins her speech with greetings to the Democratic party, letting the people know that everyone is supporting her. Ultimately, Clinton appeals towards ethos and direct pathos while Trump has more effective pathos and logos.
Victor, I agree with what you said about Clinton and Trump's appeal to ethos, pathos, and logos. Trump varied his appeal much more than Clinton did, which made it effective. Not only that, but each one bled into the another. Trump's use of logos evoked the emotion in his audience. His reference to the issues that linger in the nation further stirred their fear and instability. Trump even claims that safety will be restored once he becomes president.
ReplyDeleteDo you believe that Trump's strong use of pathos can only go so far, is it limited, will his appeal to fear continue? If you caught the presidential debates, did he do the same there?
Victor I 100% agree with you! Nevertheless, Trump's speech was exceeding the effectiveness of Hillarys'. I may not agree with a thing that Trump preaches about, but the man himself is a genius in getting his point across to the nation. As you mentioned, his exquisite use of pathos where he instilled fear in the audience with additional logos would make me even want to vote for him in a way. Also, while Hillary reached out to mothers of fallen soldiers and women of all ages who aren't paid in a uniformly manner as men, etc; she uses much pathos as well. But, she doesn't come off nearly as effective as Mr.Trump, who presents his speech ( in a boasting manner) as he mailulates many and appeals to their morals, emotions and authority. A clever way to get votes and enter the presidential oval office. What is one thing you think Hillary should change in her addresses to become as effective as Trump? Do you agree instilling fear in the audience is the way to go or more so like Hillary whereas she stands with the audience?
ReplyDelete