Rhetorical Analysis of The Perils of Indifference Speech by Elie Wiesel

Though many speeches have been given, none are like the one of Elie Wiesel. His distressed and sympathetic tone helps reach his audience: the President, First Lady, White House officials, and the American people. Millions of innocent people died in the century's genocides, civil wars, and world wars. Elie Wiesel gave "The Perils of Indifference" speech on the verge of a new millennium in the hope that people would remember all the atrocities and learn from what he had to say so the next century would not be filled with similar kinds of suffering. He stresses that part of being human means being accountable to other humans, which is why he feels the need to share his knowledge of the past. Without this, if history had repeated, he would have felt as if the blood were on his hands because he put the metaphorical lamp under a basket. He used the rhetorical devices of Imagery, Closing by Return, Pathos, and many more to emotionally move his audience. Through Elie Wiesel's repeated use of rhetorical strategies, which taps into the audience's sympathetic yet critical side by relating to the past, effectively conveys his idea that looking at the previous goods and evils of the millennium will help humans to not repeat history. 

To begin his rampage throughout the speech, Elie impregnates the minds of the audience of his ideas of the past through imagery which enhances the vividness of the speech. He effectively does this in many cases, but most notably when he states, “Wrapped in their torn blankets, they would sit or lie on the ground, staring vacantly into space, unaware of who or where they were -- strangers to their surroundings ̈ (Wiesel, 1999, p. 2). The statement paints a picture of the people in concentration camps by showing how pitiful and forgotten they were. Without this, the audience is left to imagine what the people of the camps were like, but because he included it, it is made known how sad and miserable they were. He used the adjectives of torn and vacantly to vividly show the condition of the mindset – sorrowful and lost, as well as the physical condition of the camp and the victims within it. He furthers this painting when he says, “that the leaders of the free world did not know what was going on behind those black gates and barbed wire; that they had no knowledge of the war against the Jews that Hitler's armies ̈ (Wiesel, 1999, p. 2 & p. 3). The terms "black gates" and "barbed wire" are related to an extremely negative connotation; black – the representation of death, and barbed wire – the symbol for pain and suffering. This further moves the audience to feel sympathy for those involved. This appeals to the audience's imagination by linking words with sensory experiences.  

Adding to the minds of the audience, Elie Wiesel uses closing by return to conclude his speech by relating back to the origin; this also helps to develop an over-all idea and anecdote. This is apparent at first when he starts his story with, “Fifty-four years ago to the day, a young Jewish boy from a small town in the Carpathian Mountains woke up, not far from Goethe's beloved Weimar, in a place of eternal infamy called Buchenwald” (Wiesel, 1999, p. 1), which begins the development of a little boy and his knowledge of suffering over the years. Not only this, but he uses the word infamy, meaning being known for a substandard quality, to first grasp the minds of the audience. Elie then concludes his speech with, “And so, once again, I think of the young Jewish boy from the Carpathian Mountains... And together we walk towards the new millennium, carried by profound fear and extraordinary hope" (Wiesel, 1999, p. 4). The concluding sentence shows how the little boy never left him and the only thing that changed was his understanding and the amount of knowledge that he has. This verbally connects his point of a small, forgotten boy, to the man he is today. Elie uses closing by return to leave an impression on his audience by making his speech personal, which helps build a connection with the audience. Personal ties and connections make a speech more accepted, as well as more meaningful tying into the rhetorical device of pathos. 

Elie Wiesel's appeal to pathos taps into the audience's personal side. Pathos is thoroughly available throughout his speech and is used to continue to build the relationship with the audience, working in conjunction with the anecdote that he used when he closed by return. Elie sorrowfully stated, “Oh, we see them on television, we read about them in the papers, and we do so with a broken heart. Their fate is always the most tragic, inevitably. When adults wage war, children perish. We see their faces, their eyes" (Wiesel, 1999, p. 4). He says that waging war will cause children to perish, which creates a sense of pity within the audience for the minoritized children. This empowers those who listen to take pride in the freeness and peacefulness of our nation, in turn evoking our emotions and causing the audience to feel worse for those children and their hardships. Not only this, but when he said "Their fate is the most tragic, inevitably" he says this with a monotonous tone to draw emphasis onto the subject. His change in tone helps the audience stay engaged as well as think on the stated words because they are different than the rest. But before this, he sets the stage for the audience's emotional turmoil by bringing pathos into the speech when he says, “A thousand people -- in America, the great country, the greatest democracy, the most generous of all new nations in modern history. What happened? I do not understand. Why the indifference, on the highest level, to the suffering of the victims?” (Wiesel, 1999, p. 3). This allows the audience to self-reflect on the privilege that they have, pinpointing their view on the suffering and misfortune of others, allowing them to access the saddening, emotional side of the argument. Without this, the audience views the other side of living as a single unit, but because he points out our own indifference, the audience compares the two, allowing for the development of more pathos. Pathos is a predominant, driving force throughout the speech that helps develop many forms of Rhetoric amongst the work. However, this all fell short in his use of pronouns. 

Many public speakers use pronouns for the intended use, but they can mean much more than that. They can be singular or plural, but also, they can give human like characteristics to non-human things. In the lines, "And then, of course, the joint decision of the United States and NATO to intervene in Kosovo and save those victims, those refugees, those who were uprooted by a man, whom I believe that because of his crimes, should be charged with crimes against humanity." (Wiesel, 1999, p. 4). Eli misses the use of pronouns when referring to "Kosovo". Instead of saying "those victims" he should have said "her/his victims" giving ownership to the guilty party so that the audience would have the idea of who to blame. The guilty one is implied in the speech, but the ownership is much clearer if specifically stated, creating a clear and over running authority for a target of hatred. By giving the human-like characteristics to Kosovo, it is made easier to dislike, as well as build a unit of anger against it. 

Elie Wiesel uses many forms of rhetoric throughout his speech to build a relationship with his audience, tap into the audience's emotion to target that sympathy, and paint a picture as to how severe the atrocities were that happened within the past millennium. Going into the new millennium, he hopes to give his knowledge of the past to those who hear it for the purpose of not repeating what previously happened. He does this to give an effective speech and vocalize his idea that looking at the previous goods and evils of the millennium will help humans to not repeat history. Through the repeated use of imagery, closing by return, and pathos he leaves a lasting impression on the high representing authorities as well as the American people that America is much more different than that of other nations and we must acknowledge the difference to grow as a nation. Because of this, the audience is left to reflect on its privilege, as well as look for hope in the future in the division of indifference.