Rhetorical Analysis Essay on Martin Luther King Jr.'s 'Beyond Vietnam- A Time To Break Silence'

This essay analyzes Martin Luther King Jr.'s speech 'Beyond Vietnam- A Time To Break Silence' and examines its persuasive elements of ethos, pathos, and logos. It discusses the credibility of the speaker, emotional appeal, logical arguments, and key rhetorical devices used in the speech.

Running head: RHETORICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY
RHETORICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1RHETORICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY
Rhetorical speech analysis
According to Crick and Hogan (2017), a rhetorical speech is a speech that is not
necessarily concerned about garnering a significant response from the audience, but is rather
intended to develop a discussion amongst the audience based on the speech that has been
delivered. According to this definition, it can be said that the main thing which is the most
distinguishable part about a rhetorical speech is persuasion. For a rhetorical speech to initiate
a discussion, it is required that the speech is persuasive. This is why it has to be analyzed on
how persuasive it really is. The chosen speech for the purpose of this essay is ‘Beyond
Vietnam- A Time To Break Silence’, by Martin Luther King Jr (King Jr, 1967). This is a
speech that had been delivered in the wake of the Vietnam war. The main thing which has to
be noted in this regard is the fact that this speech had garnered a wide range of critical
appreciation in those times, for the tone of the speech, and also the choice of words that had
been used for this speech.
The speech had been delivered on the 4th of April, 1967, in which it can be clearly
made out that the speaker had been sympathizing with the then condition of the world, and
was concerned about the path which humanity had been taking in order to pursue its goals,
referring to the Vietnam war. The main argument in this essay is that the way in which
Martin Luther King Jr,way highly persuasive in nature because of the analogy, metaphors and
logic behind the speech, coupled with the credibility of the speaker himself.
The first thing to consider would be the Ethos aspect of communication. According to
the Aristotle’s model of communication, ethos refers to the credibility of the speaker, as per
Shanahan and Seele (2015). The more the credibility of the speaker, the more effective the
communication process is, because audiences tend to believe that the source if the
information is a credible one. This is the reason why the speaker in this case had a part to

2RHETORICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY
play in influencing the masses with the speech. Martin Luther King Jr. was a highly credible
person, with a mass following. He had a big part to play in diminishing racism in America,
and was a vigilant social and human rights activist. This is the reason why this speech was
able to influence the masses into believing that the speaker had a logic in whatever he was
saying. His civil rights movements were highly persuasive and each of his speeches spoke to
the emotions of the listeners and made the victims of social injustice connect to his words.
This is what made him the most prominent spokespersons in the world in those times,
perhaps in the entire world. This further led to his credibility. “I have a dream” is a speech,
which was delivered by the same speaker prior to this speech, and it still remains to be one of
the most recognizable speeches in the history of mankind. Therefore, he had already built his
record as a credible spokesperson prior to delivering this speech, which made this speech
more persuasive in nature.
This is the reason why the masses were influenced. After the speech, it prompted the
masses to think about the pathways which humanity is really pursuing, and whether it is just.
In some instances, the speech raised debates and public discussions on the issue of war. Due
to the truthfulness impression that people had about this person, it was obvious that the
people of the country were highly moved by the speech delivered on the injustice that is
being to the innocents, just for the sole reason of ensuring that the political leaders and elite
men all over the world had their personal and political goals fulfilled. It prompted people to
think that humanity was perhaps becoming selfish and overlooking civil rights and emotions
for the sake of greediness. One more factor that contributed to raise a discussion on the topic
is the fact that the second world war, which killed millions all over the world, was still fresh
in the minds of a lot of people, since it had only ended a couple of decades prior to the
delivery of this speech. With Martin Luther King Jr. explaining the inappropriateness of the
situation regarding killing off innocents and sacrificing lives for the sake of politics, it urged

3RHETORICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY
people to remember the dark days of the second world war, which the entire world wanted to
avoid at all costs.
The second factor, which has to be talked about, after discussing the ethos factor of
the Aristotle’s model of communication, would be pathos. Pathos, according to the model,
refers to emotions. In general terms, it does not mean how much emotional a speech is in its
delivery approaches, but rather refers to how much the audiences can emotionally connect to
the speech (Wróbel 2015). When a speaker speaks to the emotions of the people, triggering
their own emotional connection to an issue, it prompts them to be influenced by the speech,
ad admire what has to be said to them. This further leads them to share their own views on
the issue. This is after all what a rhetoric speech lives for. The sharing of views after being
emotionally triggered by a speech, leads people to initiate conversations, which eventually
evolves into a discussion. This is technically what happened in this case to be precise. The
main thing which has to be considered in this regard is the fact that the audiences could
connect to the speaker through their emotions, which prompted them to believe that the
Vietnam war was more of a misery for mankind than a milestone. This emotional trigger
played a part in initiating the widespread discussion which followed for weeks after the
speech. People wanted others to feel the same way that they did, and thereby be able to make
sure that they could be understood, and thereby, the sharing of views followed.
The tone of the speech also played a big part in initiating this conversation, and
speaking to the hearts of the people. The speaker kept a very low voice and pitch,
demonstrating specifically on strong metaphoric words at regular intervals. Overall, if given a
careful listen to, one can make out that the speaker himself was deeply grieved about the
Vietnam War. This is evident from the way in which he says, “I come to this magnificent
house of worship tonight, because my dungeons leave me no other choice.” The pace of this
sentence was so slow, that one could not help but think that the speaker indeed is affected by

4RHETORICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY
some issue, and has to channel it out to the public. Had this been a fast paced, loud voice, it
would not have been able to create the same emotional appeal that it did. The speech was
spoken in such a soothing and yet painful tone, that American rock band, Linkin Park
adopted the audio of the speech to their studio album, A Thousand Suns, as a prequel to their
single, Iridescent (Linkin Park, 2008). Martin Luther King Junior further goes on to say how
burning human beings with napalm is unjust, which perhaps could be a hyperbole. However,
this exaggeration could be relatable to the main audience, as they could figure out what the
speaker was trying to refer in the context of the speech. It also prompted one to think about
the injustice that is being done to the human lives, who are normally innocent victims. He
further says that these acts of injustice cannot be reconciled with wisdom justice and love,
triggering an emotion of regret and helplessness in the minds of the people that whatever is
being done to innocent souls, is something that cannot be compensated.
The last element of persuasive speaking according to Aristotle’s model of
communication is none other than logos, which refers to logic. As the meaning suggests,
logos refers to the logic, which the speaker has in what he or she is saying. If there is no
logic, ethos and pathos irreversibly become extinct in the communication process, and it
disrupts the whole effectiveness of the communication (Stucki and Sager 2018). However, in
this speech, the speaker has been able to ensure that he had logic in everything that he was
conveying to the audiences, just as much as ethos or pathos, or perhaps even more than any
of the both. Logic defined the entire speech when the speaker brought out the issue of
innocent lives being killed by the greed of politics. This is because people could relate to the
logic behind it, since the Vietnam war did in fact kill off a lot of innocent lives.
There exist several photographs of the event, portraying the brutality of the event in a
very explicit way, showing dead bodies and disfigured faces that followed the Vietnamese
people post the war. Most of these people were civilians, who perhaps had nothing to do with

5RHETORICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY
the war, but somehow found themselves under the attack of the war. Therefore, there was
obviously logic to back the idea of lives being sacrificed to the greed of war and politics. This
is the reason why a lot of men and women protested against the Vietnam war, in Vietnam,
and also largely in America itself. The fact that this war is still considered to be one of the
most brutal acts in human history, can therefore be somewhat attributed to the logic which the
speaker had in this very popular speech. Apart from that, the speaker rightly pointed out
indirectly that soldiers who fought the battle have a life too. It is cruel to think that they are
only born to fight, and the fact that they return with bloody faces, and other brutalities is
something that cannot be reconciled. This is the reason why the main argument behind this
speech is that human rights apply to all humans across the world, and is universal in nature.
Therefore, no political party or nation has the right to violate them, no matter what the
intentions are, just for the sake of their own interests. This, according to Martin Luther King
Jr. is the reason why it needs to stop and we must learn to empathize with others. This is a
point which perhaps no one can argue in retaliation in any way, through any choice of words,
thereby making the argument of the speaker vehemently strong, and packed with logic.
Last but not the least, to analyze the effectiveness or appreciate a rhetoric speech, the
key rhetorical devices have to be analyzed. The first device that needs to be pointed out is
allusion. Allusion refers to the reference of an event or time, place or person (Bennet and
Royle 2016). This is significantly pointed out by the speaker in this context, since the main
context of the speech is nothing but the Vietnam War. It is in this context, that he says that
the act of leaving soldiers psychologically deranged and physically battered, cannot be
reconciled with anything. This is clearly aimed at the Vietnam War, since that is the most
recent occurrence to the date of the speech itself, and can be understood by anyone in the
audience about what the speaker is trying to refer to. In fact, this is just the most vivid
allusion to the event of the Vietnam war. In actuality, it could be clearly understood by

6RHETORICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY
anyone in the audience about the context in which the speaker has been speaking. The phrase
“Burning humans with Napalm” was enough to convey that the speaker is upset about the
occurrences of the Vietnam War, since such a brutality did take place there. It might not be
decipherable at a glance to anyone living today, but with the strong sensations prevailing
across America during those times, about the recent Vietnam war, one could not possibly
decipher any other reference than this one.
It is also said that Antithesis plays a big part in a rhetoric speech, since it is an
element, which is responsible for making connections of one event with another thing,
thereby establishing logic in the speech (Slater 2018). In this context, it is human rights and
war or politics. This can be clearly understood from the speaker when he makes references to
“true revolution of values will lay hand on world order”, and “this way of settling differences
is not just.” In this context, it can be clearly understood that the speaker is talking about
politicians and world leaders deciding the fate of the world by themselves, in their own
interests and values, and how that leads to unjust ways of violating civil rights of the innocent
people who lose their lives in the process of wars and conflicts.
There has been a pinch of hyperbole in the speech as well. This can be made from the
fact that the speaker uses phrases like “Psychologically deranged”, and “Burning human
beings with napalm”, and “magnificent house of worship.” These are some phrases which
exaggerate a situation from what it really is, simply for the purpose of letting people realize
how bad a particular situation truly is, behind what it looks like (Levin 2016). It is through
these hyperboles, that the speaker has been able to trigger sentiments of the audience, to aid
them in moving along with the speech. It is also for these hyperboles, that the speech had a
literary beauty in it, which makes it recognizable today.

7RHETORICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY
From the above discussion in this essay, it can be concluded that Martin Luther King
was a highly popular spokesperson and civil rights activist, who has given one of the most
recognizable speeches in history, which had led up to his credibility to his speech on the
Vietnam war. This played a very crucial factor in this rhetorical speech, since the main thing
which has to be noted in this regard is the fact that the speaker was highly believable in the
eyes of the audience, owing to his previous deeds and records as a spokesperson, which made
the messages from the speaker effective in influencing the audience. Another factor was
emotions. The speaker was able to modulate his voice according to the speech and was also
able to use some words which spoke directly to the hearts of the audience, triggering their
emotions. This made them connect to the situation even more, thereby making the
communication effective. The speaker also had logic to back these factors up, since his main
argument was that human rights are universal and no political party or nation or nation has
the right to violate it. People found a logic in this argument, and therefore, this influenced
them even more. Last but not the least, there were several key rhetorical devices, which
played their parts in ensuring that the speech was perfectly composed. This included a clear
allusion, a string antithesis, and a little pinch of hyperbole.

8RHETORICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY

9RHETORICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY
References
Bennett, A. and Royle, N., 2016. An introduction to literature, criticism and theory.
Routledge.
Crick, N. and Hogan, J.M., 2017. Rhetorical public speaking. Routledge.
King Jr, M.L., 1967. Beyond Vietnam: A time to break silence. speech, Riverside Church,
New York, NY, April, 4.
Levin, M., 2015. Claudia Claridge. Hyperbole in English: A corpus-based study of
exaggeration. ICAME Journal, 39(1), pp.140-144.
Linkin Park (2008). Wisdom, Justice and Love. [CD] California: Warner Brothers.
Shanahan, F. and Seele, P., 2015. Shorting Ethos: exploring the relationship between
Aristotle’s Ethos and Reputation Management. Corporate Reputation Review, 18(1), pp.37-
49.
Slater, J., 2018. Attitudes of Collaborative Expectancy: Antithesis, Gradatio, and A Rhetoric
of Motives, Page 58. Rhetoric Review, 37(3), pp.247-258.
Stucki, I. and Sager, F., 2018. Aristotelian framing: logos, ethos, pathos and the use of
evidence in policy frames. Policy sciences, 51(3), pp.373-385.
Wróbel, S., 2015. Logos, Ethos, Pathos. Classical Rhetoric Revisited. Polish Sociological
Review, 191(3), pp.401-421.