Experiential Learning #3
Critique on Mary Fisher: “A Whisper of Aids”
Viewed from: http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/maryfisheraids.html
As I was browsing through the American Rhetoric speech bank I noticed this speech because of the title, it really caught my attention. Along with the title I decided to choose it because I was looking for a woman speaker and it also came along with a video of the actual speech. I actually thought Mary Fisher was an actress, maybe she is, or did some acting in the past, she does look a little familiar. However, actress or not, the message she put forth with that speech certainly had nothing to do with acting.
The speech started off with a narrative introduction of Mary Fisher who is the daughter of Republican leader and Presidential advisor Max Fisher. She herself has also served the White House Post under President Ford. She is also the founder of the Family AIDS Network. A year before this speech she was diagnosed with HIV. The speech was delivered on August 19, 1992 at the Republican National Convention Address in Houston, Texas. The general purpose and message of the speech was to present a challenge of awareness to the people of her party, the United States, and the World.
In addition to critiquing the speech in general, I also wanted to critique the way in which Mary delivered her speech and the affect her speech and its message had on the audience. To begin the topic was an excellent one. Something as serious as HIV and AIDS always does exactly what an excellent topic is supposed to do, draw attention from listeners. The general purpose of the speech was obvious from the beginning and it did not stray from its meaning. It was clear that the speech was well planned because it had various components that helped the message come across including: personal knowledge and experience, facts, statistics and description, and it developed suspense within the audience. Because Mary has been diagnosed with the disease that she speaks so passionately about she has personal knowledge and experience of its affects, and this identifies with the audience and makes her message that much more special and honorable. The description that she introduces along with the statistics of how many people are and will be affected by this disease in the coming years develops suspense within the audience. They become startled when she mentions how she can identify with the young Black infant that is in the hospital fighting for his life. The speech tends to flow from point to point; the only pauses are used for dramatic purposes only. I couldn’t really tell where her main points began or ended, therefore I don’t know how many she used, but the important thing is that she clearly got her message across.
From the beginning Mary wanted to make it clear that the purpose for her being there was to share her message. After stating this she jumped right in with informing her audience that she was not looking for applause, but requested them to hear her and take action. Her speech was either memorized or was on the teleprompt, I couldn’t really tell. But she did maintain eye contact with members of the audience and the camera. As previously stated, she did make a few pauses to add effect, and it worked. A couple of examples that Mary used to draw in her audience include when she stated “We have killed each other with our ignorance, our prejudice, and our silence.” After she stated this she received applause from the audience. Another example is when she asked the question, “Are you human?” When she asked this question she was referring to the fact that most people mistreat those who are diagnosed with HIV or AIDS. I believe in this she got what she was looking for, a reaction from the audience. The only thing that I found a bit disruptive from the flow of the speech was I was looking for more on the actual disease. I was looking for a little bit more information on what it is and how it actually affects those who are diagnosed with it. I think this might have been a bit more effective, especially to an audience that has abandoned the thought of acknowledging the disease and its effects all together. Other than that her body language was neither good nor bad. It didn’t add or take away, so I guess it really didn’t play too much of a role, so watching it on video didn’t provide me with what I thought it would like gestures or
Lastly, as previously stated, the effect of the speech on the audience was great; and by great I mean huge and lasting. The attention of the audience was captured from the beginning and people didn’t budge until the standing ovation. I believe her speech was successful with the audience because of the topic, of course, and how she told her personal story to reinforce her point, for example bringing in the thought of her kids and how their lives are affected. She also connected with the audience on a personal level by saying that everyone was at risk; she even reinforced a lesson learned, saying “If you believe you’re safe, you’re at risk.” In the end a whole boatload of people were crying; they were obviously touched by the message.
In conclusion, the speech made me feel like I could make a difference. I usually don’t like hearing about topics like this because in the end I feel helpless. At the end of this I felt both helpless and scared. Helpless because I wouldn’t know the first thing to do to help others in this situation, and scared because like she said, once you think your safe, you’re at risk. Whatever the case may be I know the message got across to its audience and I hope there are others out there making a difference.
Viewed from: http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/maryfisheraids.html
As I was browsing through the American Rhetoric speech bank I noticed this speech because of the title, it really caught my attention. Along with the title I decided to choose it because I was looking for a woman speaker and it also came along with a video of the actual speech. I actually thought Mary Fisher was an actress, maybe she is, or did some acting in the past, she does look a little familiar. However, actress or not, the message she put forth with that speech certainly had nothing to do with acting.
The speech started off with a narrative introduction of Mary Fisher who is the daughter of Republican leader and Presidential advisor Max Fisher. She herself has also served the White House Post under President Ford. She is also the founder of the Family AIDS Network. A year before this speech she was diagnosed with HIV. The speech was delivered on August 19, 1992 at the Republican National Convention Address in Houston, Texas. The general purpose and message of the speech was to present a challenge of awareness to the people of her party, the United States, and the World.
In addition to critiquing the speech in general, I also wanted to critique the way in which Mary delivered her speech and the affect her speech and its message had on the audience. To begin the topic was an excellent one. Something as serious as HIV and AIDS always does exactly what an excellent topic is supposed to do, draw attention from listeners. The general purpose of the speech was obvious from the beginning and it did not stray from its meaning. It was clear that the speech was well planned because it had various components that helped the message come across including: personal knowledge and experience, facts, statistics and description, and it developed suspense within the audience. Because Mary has been diagnosed with the disease that she speaks so passionately about she has personal knowledge and experience of its affects, and this identifies with the audience and makes her message that much more special and honorable. The description that she introduces along with the statistics of how many people are and will be affected by this disease in the coming years develops suspense within the audience. They become startled when she mentions how she can identify with the young Black infant that is in the hospital fighting for his life. The speech tends to flow from point to point; the only pauses are used for dramatic purposes only. I couldn’t really tell where her main points began or ended, therefore I don’t know how many she used, but the important thing is that she clearly got her message across.
From the beginning Mary wanted to make it clear that the purpose for her being there was to share her message. After stating this she jumped right in with informing her audience that she was not looking for applause, but requested them to hear her and take action. Her speech was either memorized or was on the teleprompt, I couldn’t really tell. But she did maintain eye contact with members of the audience and the camera. As previously stated, she did make a few pauses to add effect, and it worked. A couple of examples that Mary used to draw in her audience include when she stated “We have killed each other with our ignorance, our prejudice, and our silence.” After she stated this she received applause from the audience. Another example is when she asked the question, “Are you human?” When she asked this question she was referring to the fact that most people mistreat those who are diagnosed with HIV or AIDS. I believe in this she got what she was looking for, a reaction from the audience. The only thing that I found a bit disruptive from the flow of the speech was I was looking for more on the actual disease. I was looking for a little bit more information on what it is and how it actually affects those who are diagnosed with it. I think this might have been a bit more effective, especially to an audience that has abandoned the thought of acknowledging the disease and its effects all together. Other than that her body language was neither good nor bad. It didn’t add or take away, so I guess it really didn’t play too much of a role, so watching it on video didn’t provide me with what I thought it would like gestures or
Lastly, as previously stated, the effect of the speech on the audience was great; and by great I mean huge and lasting. The attention of the audience was captured from the beginning and people didn’t budge until the standing ovation. I believe her speech was successful with the audience because of the topic, of course, and how she told her personal story to reinforce her point, for example bringing in the thought of her kids and how their lives are affected. She also connected with the audience on a personal level by saying that everyone was at risk; she even reinforced a lesson learned, saying “If you believe you’re safe, you’re at risk.” In the end a whole boatload of people were crying; they were obviously touched by the message.
In conclusion, the speech made me feel like I could make a difference. I usually don’t like hearing about topics like this because in the end I feel helpless. At the end of this I felt both helpless and scared. Helpless because I wouldn’t know the first thing to do to help others in this situation, and scared because like she said, once you think your safe, you’re at risk. Whatever the case may be I know the message got across to its audience and I hope there are others out there making a difference.
posted by jerseygirl @ 11:43 AM
1 Comments:
At 7:19 PM,
s said…
This one is also thorough, though with fewer concepts from the course. I agree with your suggestion that she say more about what the disease does--as compelling as her appeals to pathos were, letting people know a bit more about it would have had a more lasting effect.
Post a Comment
<< Home