In
creating a speech, it is directly written to appeal the audience; whoever that
may be. The importance of the audience will play a significant role in the authors dialect, presentation and content
of their speech. As "This is Water" was a commencement speech spoken
to graduates entering the real world, it was molded by what the graduates can
expect in their future. Throughout this speech, Wallace uses colloquial
language to connect with the younger audience. In doing so, she can evoke
emotion, imagination and engage the audience into really digesting her words instead of just listening.
In comparison to "This is Water," Morrison's lecture, was immensely
formal in language. Hence the difference in titling of the two speeches, one is
labeled a “lecture” as the other is given a more thought-provoking, less black
and white, title. This alone can alert the reader in how the two essays
difference from each other. Morrison’s lecture was strictly written to receive
a very respected award, therefore was written to appeal a formal audience, and
to commemorate thanks. On the
other hand, “This is Water,” was not written for a ridged audience, it was
written for an audience who needed encouraging, nonetheless, inspiration. This
essay was written to be felt by the heart, and to stay in the back of the minds of
those graduating. The very difference in these two essays is the attitude the
authors are gaining to receive from their audiences through their depicted language.
I think you did and excellent job on describing how both speeches were written. How that Wallace used more of a "common language" anyone can relate to or understand easier because it was spoken to a more general audience such as graduates. The way you described the Morrison Lecture had great detail and the points you made were very clear to me on why it was more formal and inspirational. Overall I thought you summed up why each speech was written the way it was and what audience it was for pretty well in a short given amount you typed out for.
ReplyDelete