Stephen Harper's Residential School Apology Analysis

In the two articles under analysis, the authors are issuing a response to the formal apology speech given by the former Prime Minister Stephen Harper. In 2011, an apology speech was being delivered to the Aboriginal peoples and its survivors of the Residential Schools System in Canada during nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The aboriginal people in Canada have been subjected to very abusive and stressful conditions in residential schools, and as such, the acknowledgment was meant to make amends for the various social injustices that had meted out to them by the Canadian Government. In Lynda Gray’s article, "Why silence greeted Stephen Harper 's residential-school apology," she opines that the Prime Minister’s speech was overall detached

According to her, the speech was lacking in substance and demonstrated a lack of genuine commitment and goodwill on the part of the Canadian government to the right the wrongs that had been committed against the aboriginals. On the other hand, Beverly attempts to adopt a more cautious approach in her dialogue. She starts off by expressing her gratitude to the Stephen Harper for issuing the apology on behalf of the Canadian government. However, she goes ahead to note that despite the current efforts to make amends, there had been systemic challenges that needed to be addressed before any kind of progress was to be made (Jacobs

She supplements her article with anecdotes from her own childhood and family members. Thes memories enable her to establish a connection with her audience and as such her pathos appeal is significant. Her educational background and intimate knowledge of the subject matter enables her to explore ways of convincing the audience. On the other hand, Gray’s position is lacking in the use of pathos since it is essentially a bashing of the Prime Minister’s apology speech. The feature is riddling with facts and figures which are not likely to dissuade the audience to her personal point of view. The pathos appeal of these two articles is thus significantly different. Based on their rhetorical allusiveness, Beverly’s response is therefore likely to be more effective on its audience due to its strong ethos, pathos and logical