Rhetorical Analysis Of Martin Luther King's Response To The Clergymen

Dr. King’s response to the Clergymen’s statements seems to “just” their “unjust assumptions. Starting with Dr. King using his authority of being a person of color; while the Clergymen have legal authority they do not have racial authority. The Clergymen have not experienced the racial prejudice that Martin Luther King and the black community have. Martin Luther King uses examples such as “When you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six-year-old daughter why she can’t go to the public amusement park that has been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children.” (page 176 paragraph 14) In this statement King uses ethos as well as pathos. This statement is very emotional due to the fact that he has experienced this and the current race issue is also affecting his daughter emotionally, this situation gives authority to King, almost as if he was saying “did you have to explain this situation to your child like I have?”

The Clergymen’s statements use of rhetorical devices are more of propaganda or inductive. On the other hand Martin Luther King’s letter included a larger variety of rhetorical devices such as Antithesis, Juxtaposition, Anecdotes, allusion and most used perspective. While both the Clergymen and King use perspective, King uses his perspective in a more in depth manner while the Clergymen only perspective in their fifth and third statements while King uses his perspective throughout his letter. The Clergymen use inductive reasoning as they stick close to the law and refer to “an Appeal for Law and Order and Common Sense.” often once in the first statement and another time in the fifth