Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
Martin Luther King, Jr.'s rhetorical motives behind his final speech, “I've Been to the Mountaintop.” King faced opposition towards his ...
Typology: Exercises
1 / 156
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
by Nathan Robert Lapin An Independent Study Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Course Requirements for Senior Independent Study: The Department of Communication March 1 3, 2015 Advisor: Denise Bostdorff, Ph.D.
ii
The purpose of this study was to examine Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s rhetorical motives behind his final speech, “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop.” King faced opposition towards his leadership and his civil disobedience method due to failed events prior to the oration. His goals for his delivery of the “Mountaintop” speech included reinstating his leadership as well as reinvigorating his nonviolent approach in the Civil Rights Movement in Memphis. I employed a cluster agon analysis, which is a branch of dramatism, to the speech. This Burkean method of analysis involved the examination of “God” and “Devil” terms and how they conveyed the ultimate ideal message King wanted his audience in Memphis and beyond to follow as well as the ultimate evil message King wanted them to avoid. King offered his audience of sanitation workers as well as others involved with the Civil Rights Movement a choice of whether to accept his message or not, while using his rhetorical discourse to eliminate division among the audience and convince them to go in the direction of nonviolent demonstration for civil and economic rights. This study helps uncover how “God” and “Devil” terms help speakers persuade their audience to take action. Key Words: cluster criticism, cluster agon analysis, Martin Luther King, Jr., “God” and “Devil” terms, “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop,” motive, Civil Rights Movement, injustice, unification
viii Final Thoughts ...................................................................................................................... 131 WORKS CITED................................................................................................................................... 134
cluster criticism, a rhetorical method that may provide us insight into the motives King offered during a difficult time in the Civil Rights Movement. In the past, Thomas Rosteck and Bethany Keely studied this speech using narrative criticism, focusing on themes in speech (Keely; Rosteck). Some of the themes in King’s final speech include, but are not limited to; unity, nonviolence, religion, redemption, and the overcoming of obstacles. Christopher Lynch focused on how rhetorical form and message contributed to storytelling in the “Mountaintop” speech (Lynch 16). None of these scholars, however, explained how “God” and “Devil” terms played a role in the meaning of the speech, which is the objective of cluster criticism. This study is also important because it will teach listeners how to break down and analyze speeches for themselves. My second rationale for this case study is that it might provide deeper awareness to the discourse of a highly skilled orator who others might learn from for their own rhetoric. To be an effective speaker, one can study strategies from previous speeches to apply those skills to their own rhetorical speeches. This study aids future speakers to prepare to use their own “God” and “Devil” terms effectively. When upcoming leaders identify the form of the speech, they organize what they heard and analyze what the studied speaker delivered critically. In essence, the future speakers will distinguish what tactics the orator uses in his or her speech. The more speakers who know about rhetorical strategies such as “God” and “Devil” terms, the better they can utilize the terms to convey messages in their own speeches. Along with the impact messages have on future rhetoricians, it is also important to understand King’s message in the “Mountaintop” speech. My third rationale for this study is that King’s messages on civil rights are still relevant today. King’s goal to obtain comprehensive equal rights for African-Americans through nonviolent, direct action still applies in current situations, such as the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, and the ‘Walmart’
shooting of John Crawford III in Cincinnati, Ohio. The protests within the communities these young men belonged to contrasted significantly. On the talk show program, Democracy NOW! , Amy Goodman and Juan González interviewed Rashad Robinson, executive director of Color of Change, who highlighted the similarities between these cases and stated both cases relate to protests for social justice and civil rights (Goodman and González). The difference he noted between the two was how one protest resorted to violence and another employed a peaceful demonstration. These shootings highlighted the need for the continued discussion for civil rights as well as King’s message in the “Mountaintop” speech. Definitions Three terms must be defined for readers to understand this study. First, Burke defined the term rhetoric as language used to create different attitudes and inspire action in an audience (Foss 63). When orators use rhetoric for this purpose, they need to have structure, so the audience will have the ability to grasp the overall message of the speech they present. Daughton and Hart define structure as “the apportionment and sequencing of message elements” (103). Structure is vital to my study because many of King’s speeches, mainly his “Mountaintop” speech, involved a sequence of events for the reader or listener to anticipate what the next part is (Holland 354). The “Mountaintop” speech can be ruled as a problem-solution sequence. According to Daughton and Hart, this sequence is when the speaker’s rhetorical function is to support specific actions needed to solve problems (109). An advantage of this sequence is how it helps establish a common ground within the audience, especially if both the rhetor and the listeners are attempting to overcome the same obstacles. In his “Mountaintop” address, King and the audience tried to obtain better working conditions for the sanitation employees in Memphis, Tennessee. They also fought for complete racial equality. I will analyze how King used structure
task with the smallest but most effective amount of resources. Daughton and Hart further demonstrated the efficiency of ultimate terms when they used the example pig as a “Devil” term, because it can inflict many strong emotions (155). The term pig, in the sixties, defined the police as “filthy” when they abused their power and used unethical practices upon many civil rights activists, including King (155). Ultimate terms are also hierarchial, which is why they are called ultimate. They are terms that are at the pinnacle of society’s values and subvert all lesser terms (156). Ultimate terms are used to make a rival case small or unimportant, while building up the rhetor’s case at the same time. This leads to anticipation of what reforms can come from the orator’s use of these terms, which make ultimate terms pre-emptive, where they allow a speaker “to carve out rhetorical territory then seal it off from others” (156). This means that listeners can take away what an orator preaches due to the use of ultimate terms, depending on whether a speaker uses “God” or “Devil” terms to convey the message. This helps speakers deliver their message, cut it off, and provide the audience with a sole outlet leading them to the speaker’s direction. Ultimate terms form a consistent message among the audience, and the orator can exchange words throughout the speech to provide effect. The rhetor uses words that are attached to a similar meaning that is clustered towards the direction of the message provided. These are labeled ultimate terms because “Devil” terms embody the ultimate evil, whereas “God” terms characterize the utimate ideal for an orator (Foss 67). Rhetors may use “God” and “Devil” terms to group words together under one category (Ronis 4). According to Ronis, “Burke uses the phrase ‘god-term’ to refer to a word or phrase that has the power to subordinate and thus color all other terms that follow as part of its linguistic routine” (1). For example, if I make “success” a “God” term, then words such as freedom, graduation, and winning must somehow relate or build
up to the concept of “success.” It is the same with “Devil” terms. If “sin” is the “Devil” term, words that will be categorized or lead up to the concept of “sin” may include adultry, lust, theft, and murder. Description of Method I apply the rhetorical method of cluster criticism, which is a branch of Burkean dramatistic criticism, in this study. According to Foss, cluster criticism examines what key terms structure drama, the speaker’s motive, discourse and how meaning is assigned to the terms (83). The key terms on which my study will focus are known as “God” and “Devil” terms. These terms allow me to analyze the text of “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop,” centering my attention on how King created meaning around key terms to motivate his audience to keep pushing the Civil Rights Movement forward. Conclusion As the Civil Rights Movement progressed, the method activists used to obtain equality turned from peaceful to violent. Rival leaders of King, such as Stokely Carmichael, became agitated and advocated violent methods as well as encourage separatism from whites. To combat this, through King’s final speech, “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop,” King attempted to find a way to encourage members of his audience in Memphis to get the movement back on a nonviolent path. In this chapter, I examined the “Mountaintop” speech through the rhetorical method of cluster criticism, and have provided a brief description of the method. I chose this method because it has not been applied to the “Mountaintop” speech before my study. The intent of this study is to make sure speakers and listeners are aware of the tactics King used in his “Mountaintop” speech, so they can critique his use of “God” and “Devil” terms and perhaps
My literature review will encompass the Burkean theory of Dramatism, the rhetorical branch on which cluster criticism is based. Prior to embarking on the cluster analysis, my readers must understand the comprehensive history of The Civil Rights Movement, as well as the obstacles which impeded audience agreement with the orator. I will also discuss Martin Luther King, Jr. and the past research on his rhetoric, as well as introduce King’s final speech prior to his assassination, “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop,” and past research on that speech. Dramatism Burkean Dramatism is the theoretical perspective of my study. In the following, I explain the assumptions of Dramatism and then discuss two concepts important to this study: Ultimate terms and identification. Assumptions of Dramatistim When Burke explained the main principles of Dramatism, he discussed rhetoric and how it functions similar to drama. Humans use rhetoric to create meaning in the world because humans are symbol-using beings (Burke, Language as a Symbolic Action, 53). Symbols begin relationships with others, as well as influence the social world (Hauser 206). A dramatistic approach to oratory allows us to comprehend the broad range of rhetoric. Burke examined all forms of discourse because all messages can be rhetorical (Daughton and Hart 263). According to Hauser, due to symbolic language, humans create images; without symbolic language, humans are no different from any other animal (204). With symbols, humans create rhetoric every time they speak. While rhetoric is present everywhere, Burke also thought drama is present wherever a mass gathering occurs. Burke assumed all life is considered drama; therefore, rhetoric provides
drama (Daughton and Hart 265). To clarify this assumption, to be a successful orator, one must use rhetoric as a course of dramatic action. A main assumption of Dramatism states motives are always present in rhetoric because a rhetor’s description of a situation encourages the audience to act accordingly. To engage in a Burkean analysis of a speech, a critic must delve into the orator’s vocabulary of motives, which is defined as the rationalization of actions through discourse (Daughton and Hart 266). According to Burke, “our words for motive are…words for situation” (qtd. in Bostdorff 14). Burke meant that motives explain and display why a rhetorical situation occurred, meaning they help the critic understand the situation. Burke also noted how a speaker’s discourse can clarify the “strategy the rhetor has taken to deal with the situation” (Bostdorff 16). Not only do motives explain why the situation occurred, but also how the rhetor used motives to solve the problem. For example, occassionally on the news we see a mother or father shoplifting toys or food for a holiday from a department store. Initially, when we hear about this, we may think this parent is lazy and simply steals for their child’s benefit (or even themselves) without working or paying for the goods. When we hear the reasoning of the shoplifter, which is that he or she does not have the finances to buy the food or toys, as viewers of the speaker or rhetorical actor we feel sympathetic. While we do not condone the parent’s actions because he or she disobeyed the law, we still understand the motive behind his or her situation. The parent shoplifted to try to make ammends for the lack of money to buy food and toys for his or her children for the respective holiday. The shoplifting parent is representative of the Burkean statement that terms for a situation are equated with terms for motive. The choices orators make portray their motive for the rhetorical situation they address.
ideal world view, they will not likely question the rhetor’s use of ultimate terms, which are powerful symbols which contribute to meaning making. Rhetors construct different views of the world with ultimate terms. Through the use of “God” and “Devil” terms, orators apply symbols to influence and encourage an audience to view the world from the speaker’s rhetorical perspective. “God” and “Devil” terms make the message persuasive, as well as reflect the rhetor’s vocabulary of motives (Burke, Grammar of Motives 109; Hauser 215) When rhetors urge their listeners to follow their path or challenge them to take the rhetor’s desired course of action for their audience, they provide their audience with motives for action. For example, a speaker could argue for their audience to be selfless as well as avoid greed. How orators incite their audience to identify with their speech depends on how they employ ultimate terms. Identification If a rhetor can encourage his or her audience to identify with the message, then the rhetor can persuade the audience successfully. According to Burke, identification and persuasion are equivalent to consubstantiality, “to describe this association, as two entities are united in substance through common ideas, attitudes, material possessions, or other properties, they are consubstantial” (qtd. in Foss 63). Burke argued even though division in an audience is present, it can be overcome through identification, persuasion, and consubstantiality (Burke, Grammar of Motives, 109). If the speaker who delivered the rhetoric conveyed his or her message, the rhetoric could unify the audience while addressing the specific issue (Hauser 214). Identification is important to my analysis of the “Mountaintop” speech because I will examine how King attempted to unite the audience of the Civil Rights Movement, although divided on the best approach to civil rights, through the use of ultimate terms that encouraged them to identify with
his leadership. To portray a message to the whole audience, a rhetor must have the ability to use ultimate terms not only to provide motives but also to encourage identification with the audience. Ultimate terms work together to present a particular version of reality. Some audience members identify with the orator, while others do not. Both ultimate terms and identification promote the motive for the audience to take a rhetor’s course of action. Ultimate terms are the language that passes the initiative to the audience to identify his or her message and either follow or ignore. For example, if the speaker uses ultimate terms to promote violence, the listener may identify the message as a violent course of action and will therefore have motive to ignore the speech’s message. Ultimate terms and identification not only played a major role in King’s “Mountaintop” speech, but also played a major role in the entire Civil Rights Movement. In my next section, I will discuss the historical background of the Civil Rights Movement to provide context to what became King’s final speech on April 3, 1968, “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop.” Civil Rights Movement To qualify as a social movement, a movement must be an uninstitutionalized yet organized association that is large in scale, must “promote or oppose change in societal norms and values,” face opposition, and attempt to persuade (Stewart, Smith, and Denton 25). In the fifties and sixties, African-Americans were displeased with the unfair treatment they received from the majority-ruled white United States. They expressed dissatifaction with white-enforced policies such as unequal access to both public and private facilities, restrictions on the right to vote, and unreasonable pay as well as poor working conditions (Schloeder 153, 154). The frustration with the lack of civil rights for African Americans led to “a powerful social movement sparked by the [chemistry] of civil rights activists…and black and white radicals” (Hall 1245).
