It came as no surprise to the current politicians at the March 23, 1775 Second Virginia Convention in Richmond that Patrick Henry’s purpose was to convince them of the necessity for revolution and war leading to their secession from England. At the time, the orthodox perception of Henry was not positive. Patrick Henry was considered to be quite the extremist, and this bias is a major stymie in the ethos and respectability of his speech to his fellow politicians. To overcome this bias, Patrick Henry persuasively conveys his ideas through a careful manipulation of rhetorical devices appealing to pathos and logos throughout a meticulous and intensifying organization of opinions and ideas. The most foundational of these is undeniably the organizational …show more content…
By praising the patriotism of the men who spoke against him he softens his audience. The House undoubtedly was expecting an assertation of fire and brimstone, so for the volatile man to begin by complimenting his opponents he establishes his persona not as an extremist but rather as a respectable politician. Immediately following he presents his own opinions as very different in nature, but with a hope that he would be allowed to speak openly his take on the matter. This persona and presentation make Patrick seem cool and collected while making it difficult for dissenters to disagree with him without making for themselves the image of a stick in the …show more content…
Patrick Henry asks if their gracious partition justified the naval fleets and armies that England had stationed in America. He asks what the army’s purpose could be if not to force them into submission. He asks why the colonists stand idle in the face of such undeniable and volatile intent. By asking these questions among others Henry gets his audience to actually consider the circumstances in which they are being treated. Asking them back to back the way that he does reinforces the anger. It builds a compounding case against England. The effect of one of these rhetorical question alone elicits frustration. The compounded effect of presenting these questions elicits a furiosity. A furiosity at Britain for the blatant discord between their words, actions, and promises. A furiosity that would drive them to