ipl-logo

Pericles Funeral Oration

759 Words4 Pages

Both “Pericles’ Funeral Oration” transcribed by Thucydides and “The Perils of Indifference” by Elie Wiesel demonstrate desire for a redefined culture: a culture geared towards a better societal attitude. Though both speeches address the need to honor peoples who have died (Pericles to those who have died in the Peloponnesian War; Wiesel to those who have died in the Holocaust) and invoke various feelings ranging from sorrow to pride, the manner in which both speeches present so differs slightly. The speeches use variations of tones that appeal to the audience in such a way that emphasizes their main idea.
In “Pericles’ Funeral Oration”, Pericles praises Athens, especially its democracy, in contrast to Sparta’s. He states that they are an original …show more content…

Athens, at the time, was undoubtedly the most civilized society, but that never seemed to be the cause of any sort of bragging; it only opened up the potential for Athens to receive praise. For instance, Pericles states (in contrast to Sparta) on one occasion that “there is a difference, too, in [their] educational systems. The Spartans, from their earliest boyhood, are submitted to the most laborious training in courage; [the Athenians] pass our lives without all these restrictions, and yet are just as ready to face the same dangers as they are.” Pericles appears to be prideful about the treatment, education, and enforcement of Athenians (people and trainees) in terms of their military.
The second speech, “The Perils of Indifference”, by Elie Wiesel directly addresses people with a high position in the world of U.S. politics at the time of the speech deliverance: President Clinton, Mrs. Clinton, members of the Congress, Ambassador Holbrooke, etc. However, there is an underlying message to people who are bystanders. Evident in multiple points of his speech, Wiesel consistently addresses how being a bystander is an undesirable, negative position. He goes on to use how the Jewish people felt during the Holocaust towards God and their lack of response of any kind from him as an

Show More
Related
533 Words | 3 Pages

At the time of Hitler's reign six million Jews died and even more suffered, yet the world remained silent. Six million lives could have been saved by simply speaking out against these tormentors. Eli feels strong about this subject and says, "Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor never the tormented"(Wiesel Acceptance Speech, pg 1). This helps the reader realize if society doesn't speak it takes the side of the tormentor.

Read More
816 Words | 4 Pages

In his speech, The Perils of Indifference, Elie Wiesel suggests that during the years of what was to become World War II, before America finally became involved in the conflict, that the people in power at that time knew about the plight of the Jewish people. “And now we knew, we learned, we discovered that the Pentagon knew, the State Department knew.” (Wiesel, 1999) Wiesel speaks of the deaths of millions of innocent victims at the hands of Adolf Hitler. They were, as Wiesel says earlier in the speech, “bystanders” (Wiesel, 1999) and were doing nothing to intervene.

Read More
1177 Words | 5 Pages

Cydnee Lopez Ms.Trelease English 1010 23 October 2015 Rhetorical Analysis-Perils of Indifference Well known writer, world activist, and Holocaust survivor, Elie Wiesel, in his speech, Perils of Indifference, elaborates on on the topic of indifference, within our country/society and consequences and achievements because of it. The speech was delivered on the 12th of April 1999, in Washington, D.C., as part of the Millennium Lecture Series hosted by the White House. Directed towards the audience of the White House, Government officials, and Americans. Wiesel's purpose is to show reference to how indifference has allowed many good and and bad things to happen throughout america's history.

Read More
901 Words | 4 Pages

The decision not to act can have terrible consequences, and the jewish people experienced this first hand. This is why Elie Wiesel feels it is so important for people to bear witness to their surroundings. Once an event such as The Holocaust happened, nothing could change it. This shows the Moment Elie realized that “‘Bite your lips, little brother… Don't cry. Keep your anger, your hate, for another day, for later.

Read More
439 Words | 2 Pages

The entire world was so ignorant to such a massacre of horrific events that were right under their noses, so Elie Wiesel persuades and expresses his viewpoint of neutrality to an audience. Wiesel uses the ignorance of the countries during World War II to express the effects of their involvement on the civilians, “And then I explain to him how naive we were, that the world did know and remained silent. And that is why I swore never to be silent when and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation” (Weisel). To persuade the audience, Elie uses facts to make the people become sentimental toward the victims of the Holocaust. Also, when Weisel shares his opinion with the audience, he gains people onto his side because of his authority and good reputation.

Read More
609 Words | 3 Pages

When the young boy asks, “Who would allow such crimes to be committed? How could the world remain silent”, (paragraph 5) again the audience is prompted to emotionally respond. They have to realize that it was all of them, all of us, who remained silent and that this silence must never happen again. Wiesel demonstrates a strong use of pathos throughout his speech to encourage his audience to commit to never sitting silently by while any human beings are being treated

Read More
664 Words | 3 Pages

Pericles argues that Athens has become a model for others, and articulates what it is to be a good citizen. This can be seen when he says, “although the eyes of an enemy may occasionally profit by our liberality; trusting less in system and policy than to the native spirit of our citizens; while in education, where our rivals from their very cradles by a painful discipline seek after manliness, at Athens we live exactly as we please, and yet are just as ready to encounter every legitimate danger.” (Thucydides, 2.39) It proves that Ancient Athens’ valued greatness and worked in order to achieve the excellence of the state, by focusing on rebuilding themselves back up after the Persian war. Pericles played a big role in this because he showed his ambitions to rebuild Athens, which lead to the thriving of other subjects such as literature, philosophy, science, art, and religion.

Read More
728 Words | 3 Pages

The general statement made by Elie Wiesel in his speech, The Perils of Indifference, is that indifference is sinful. More specifically, Wiesel argues that awareness needs to be brought that indifference is dangerous. He writes “Indifference is not a beginning, it is an end”. In this speech, Wiesel is suggesting that indifference is dangerous it can bring the end to many lives. In conclusion Wiesel's belief is suggesting that indifference is an end, it needs to be noticed and taken care of.

Read More
1129 Words | 5 Pages

Wiesel pinpoints the indifference of humans as the real enemy, causing further suffering and lost to those already in peril. Wiesel commenced the speech with an interesting attention getter: a story about a young Jewish from a small town that was at the end of war liberated from Nazi rule by American soldiers. This young boy was in fact himself. The first-hand experience of cruelty gave him credibility in discussing the dangers of indifference; he was a victim himself.

Read More
1284 Words | 6 Pages

Socrates and Pericles had extremely differing views about Athenian life. Pericles was a Politician, whereas Socrates was a philosopher. In “The Funeral Oration of Pericles”, Pericles contradicts himself a lot. While in “The Apology of Socrates”, Socrates does not go back on what he said in the past. He stands by everything he has said.

Read More
855 Words | 4 Pages

In the speech, titled “The Perils of Indifference,” Elie Wiesel showed gratitude to the American people, President Clinton, and Mrs. Hillary Clinton for the help they brought and apprised the audience about the violent consequences and human suffering due to indifference against humanity (Wiesel). This speech was persuasive. It was also effective because it conveyed to the audience the understanding of

Read More
1134 Words | 5 Pages

What is a good person, and how does one achieve the good life? These were the questions asked by the ancient Greeks. Arete, or excellence, was what the Greeks strove for in everything. In a quest for excellence, the Greeks experimented with new types of politics. Greece was divided into individual city-states that each had their own form of government.

Read More
552 Words | 3 Pages

Elie Wiesel Rhetorical Speech Analysis Elie Wiesel, a holocaust survivor and winner of a Nobel peace prize, stood up on April 12, 1999 at the White House to give his speech, “The Perils of Indifference”. In Wiesel’s speech he was addressing to the nation, the audience only consisted of President Clinton, Mrs. Clinton, congress, and other officials. The speech he gave was an eye-opener to the world in his perspective. Wiesel uses a variety of rhetorical strategies and devices to bring lots of emotion and to educate the indifference people have towards the holocaust. “You fight it.

Read More
806 Words | 4 Pages

Wiesel’s speech shows how he worked to keep the memory of those people alive because he knows that people will continue to be guilty, to be accomplices if they forget. Furthermore, Wiesel knows that keeping the memory of those poor, innocent will avoid the repetition of the atrocity done in the future. The stories and experiences of Wiesel allowed for people to see the true horrors of what occurs when people who keep silence become “accomplices” of those who inflict pain towards humans. To conclude, Wiesel chose to use parallelism in his speech to emphasize the fault people had for keeping silence and allowing the torture of innocent

Read More
839 Words | 4 Pages

In the speech “the Peril of Indifferences”, Wiesel talks about his story about how he survived Auschwitz from the concentration camps, and how the nations didn’t care about the plight of the Jews. On the other hand, in her speech” On women’s right to vote”, Susan, talks about what happened to her when she illegally voted in 1877 and was regarded as a crime because she voted, yet men were the only ones who were allowed to vote. Besides, both of the speech concluded with questions about the theme, for example, Susan asked whether women are persons while Wiesel questions himself whether people have learned from the past. This shows that the two speakers were showing the injustices that happened in the past as a way of learning from them to make a change and fight against any indifference from happening in the current

Read More

More about Pericles Funeral Oration

Related Topics

Open Document