En retorisk analys av Fahrenheit 9/11 ur ett dokumentärhistoriskt perspektiv

The history of rhetorics in documentary film is a long one. The French brothers Louise and Auguste Lumiére were among the first persons who produced a documentary and their work has had a big impression in the history of documentary during the 1900 century. John Grierson has been called “the father” of documentary film. He produced films in the English speaking part of the world and he is the founder of the concept “documentary film”. Propaganda filming has a big part in the history of documentary film. Most frequently it appeard in Germany before and during the secound WW II, but propaganda films has been produced in Great Britain and USA as well as in other parts of the world. Rhetorics are of current interest today. It effects the news, papers, magazines, books and movies. The purpose with this essay is to investigate the rhetorics in Michael Moores controversial documentary of September 11th, Fahrenheit 9/11. The main question is: what rhetorical tools does Michael Moore use in order to communicate his politcal message in Fahrenheit 9/11? The rhetorical analysis includes exordium, narratio, propsitio, argumentatio and conclusio as well as ethos, logos and pathos. In order to conduct the analysis I have used Kurt Johannesson’s book Retorik eller konsten att övertyga, Maria Karlberg and Brigitte Mral’s book Heder och påverkan. Att analysera modern retorik. And at last a chapter by Brigitte Mral named Retorikanalys in the book Metoder i kommunikationeverenskap, by Mats Ekström and Larsåke Larsson. For the background about the history of documentary film I have used Barsam M. Richard, Nonfiction Film A Critical History and Bjørn Sørenssen’s book Å fange virkeligheten –Dokumentarfilmens århundre.The analysis shows that Moore uses different rhetorical tools in order to point out that George W Bush is the wrong man for the role as the president of United States of America. Some of the most effective tools that Moores uses are his own voice, pictures who awakes emotions, recordings and sharp arguments. His way of using ethos, logos and pathos is very clear. The disposal can also be distinct discern, however there are some exceptions towards the classical rhetoric. One example is that Moore doesn´t describe the arrangement of the movie in exordium.

Persuading the Public : A Linguistic Analysis of Barack Obama’s Speech on “Super Tuesday” 2008

This essay examines the persuasive side of language in a speech given by Senator Barack Obama on Super Tuesday in February 2008. It studies how Senator Obama utilizes language to convince and persuade his audience. This is done from an Aristotelian point of view, meaning that the study focuses foremost on how the senator’s word choices relate to Aristotle’s three means of persuasion, ethos, pathos and logos. Those basic guiding principles are relevant to use since Aristotle’s work on the subject of rhetoric is still today one of the most relevant works in that field. The analysis is basically performed through personal observations guided by previous studies, within the frame of Aristotelian rhetoric. The results show how Senator Obama enforces the three means of persuasion through language and how it can be considered persuasive. The study might add to rhetoric studies from a linguistic perspective since it reaches a better understanding of language used in the field of politics, where rhetoric is a prominent component.

Det röda spöket : en analys av valfilmer och valmanifest inför det svenska riksdagsvalet 1948

Undersökningen syftar till att granska Högerns, Socialdemokraternas, Bondeförbundets och Folkpartiets strategier gentemot kommunisterna inför riksdagsvalet 1948. Detta görs genom en retorisk analys av negativt kampanjande i partiernas valfilmer, men också genom att granska negativ retorik i deras valmanifest. År 1948 valdes eftersom det var en uttalad unik valrörelse, mycket på grund av att det fanns djupa konfliktlinjer i den nationella såväl som den internationella politiken. Det var också det första valet efter andra världskriget. En av studiens slutsatser är att samtliga partier framställde kommunisterna som ett hot i det under-sökta källmaterialet, men Socialdemokraterna kritiserades vid flest tillfällen. Resultatet visar också att den negativa retoriken i valmanifesten inte alltid överensstämmer med valfilmernas innehåll. Studien visar även att Socialdemokraternas valfilm var den enda som inte innehöll tydlig kritik riktat mot kommunisterna, vilket kan tyda på ett ambivalent förhållningssätt. Par-tierna använde framför allt logos och pathos för att övertyga väljarna, varav den sistnämnda ges utrymme att användas i film. Två av partierna, Högern och Bondeförbundet, kan ha haft en medveten strategi att försöka övertala unga människor att inte rösta på kommunisterna. Till sist, kommunisterna var enkla att kritisera eftersom de var en del av en större rörelse och kunde därför förknippas med Sovjetunionens handlingar.