Franklin's "Speech to the Convention" was given on the last day of the Constitutional Convention (by Franklin's colleague James Wilson because Franklin was too ill to deliver it himself) and is Franklin's attempt to convince the delegates that the Constitution, in its current form, may not be perfect, but it is nearly so and therefore merits their signatures. An example of common sense and skillful use of rhetoric, the speech succeeds in convincing several delegates to sign.
Franklin's rhetorical skills are legendary, and in this short speech, he uses humility to establish his character (ethos), appeals to reason (logos), allusion to enhance his overall argument, and his trademark dry humor throughout. A unifying theme is centered in his discussion of certainty and infallibility, which he illustrates, for the most part, through allusion. He begins the speech by illustrating his own beliefs which, once held with certainty, changed, and he ends the speech with a plea to the delegates to examine their own infallibility.
The speech begins with Franklin's reminder to the delegates that he is, in fact, among the oldest and, more importantly, that he recognizes that once firm opinions can, through a person's experience, require change, a humbling reality for any listener who thinks opinions are cast in stone:
For having lived long, I have experienced instances of being obliged by better information, or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise.
In formal rhetoric, this is known as an exemplum, an illustration or example, in this case, of a man's realization that time and information may alter beliefs and opinions about "important subjects."
He then begins an extended implied comparison, using religious beliefs as a proxy for the opposing views of constitutional issues. In religious matters, most men "think themselves in possession of all truth," but Franklin goes to use another rhetorical device—allusion—to point out that this certitude is untenable if compromises must be made:
Steele a Protestant in a Dedication tells the Pope, that the only difference between our Churches in their opinions of the certainty of their doctrines is, the Church of Rome in infallible and the Church of England is never wrong.
Franklin's alludes to Richard Steele's dedication of his 1716 translation of An Account of the state of the Roman Catholic religion throughout the World, and the absurdity of certitude, especially in the context of the draft Constitution, would be clear to even the most opinionated of the delegates. He follows this with a personal anecdote of a French lady who settles disputes with "There is only me who is always right," yet another example of unexamined certitude.
Franklin's allusiveness is very complex—in the next instance, he makes an allusion that is so subtle it might not be picked up all of his listeners, but among the most well-read, the allusion would have been enlightening:
In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered.
Even though subtle, Franklin may be alluding to one of the most widely-read poems in eighteenth-century England and America, Alexander Pope's Essay on Man (1733–34). In Epistle 4, Pope addresses the proper form of government:
For forms of government let fools contest;Whate'er is best administer'd is best; For modes of faith let graceless zealots fight.
Given Franklin's wide circle of literary, political, and scientist friends, it is reasonable to think that he is alluding to a part of Pope's poem that would resonate with many of the delegates.
The speech ends with a reference to its unifying theme when Franklin expresses the wish that each delegate would "on this occasion doubt a little of his own infallibility" and sign the Constitution, as imperfect as it might be.
Franklin begins by using humor. He tells two jokes, the first one about a British author meeting the Pope and the second about a French woman who remarks that the only person she inevitably agrees with is herself. The jokes are used to make a larger point, on which is essentially an argument based on ethos. He is lending his considerable credibility to the cause of persuading the other delegates to overcome their own objections and sign the Constitution. This speech, it must be remembered, was given near the end of the Philadelphia Convention, and not all of the members were happy with the Constitution they had come up with. With this speech, he sought to persuade these people to sign the document. He revealed that he himself did not like everything about the document, but urges each delegate to put his objections aside, recognizing that no document would ever reflect the unanimous opinion of such a group. So essentially, the entire speech is an argument based on ethos: If such a personality as Franklin could be humble enough to realize that his opinions were not perfect, and that he had to be willing to compromise, then anyone could.
Franklin tries to establish a sense of ethos, which refers to the credibility of the speaker. Though he begins his speech by saying that he has certain doubts about the Constitution, he later says, "It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this System approaching so near to Perfection as it does." This line, as well as others, is designed to establish the credibility of the convention and provide bona fides for its work of drafting the Constitution.
Franklin also uses alliteration, or starting words that are close together with the same sounds, to provide a pleasing, musical quality to his speech. For example, he says the following:
And I think it will astonish our Enemies, who are waiting with Confidence to hear that our Councils are confounded, like those of the Builders of Babel, and that our States are on the Point of Separation.
In this excerpt, "confidence," "councils," and "confounded" are alliterative, as are "Builders of Babel" and "states" and "separation." In this except, he also uses an allusion to the Tower of Babel from the Bible. He says that the country's enemies expect the Constitutional Convention to wind up with discord, as resulted from the construction of the Tower of Babel, but that the convention's unity will show their enemies that this is not the case.
http://www.pbs.org/benfranklin/pop_finalspeech.html
A common rhetorical device in many speeches is the use of parallel structure, and Franklin is no different in this speech. In the third paragraph, Franklin states, "For when you assemble a Number of Men to have the Advantage of their joint Wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those Men all their Prejudices, their Passions, their Errors of Opinion, their local Interests, and their selfish Views." Franklin is arguing that this Constitution cannot be perfect because imperfect men created it, and he then lists some of the men's imperfections.
However, he follows that line with another common feature of speeches, the rhetorical question: "From such an Assembly can a perfect Production be expected?" The purpose of a rhetorical question is to push the audience toward an answer (usually in the negative). In this case, the audience is ready for Franklin's response:
It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this System approaching so near to Perfection as it does; and I think it will astonish our Enemies, who are waiting with Confidence to hear that our Councils are confounded, like those of the Builders of Babel, and that our States are on the Point of Separation, only to meet hereafter for the Purpose of cutting one another's throats.
In this quote, one will find another rhetorical technique that sways the audience, the allusion (to the Builders of Babel). Because Franklin's audience would have been Christian, they would understand that the builders of the Tower of Babel were astonished when God made their different languages unintelligible to one another.
No comments:
Post a Comment