Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Caitlin Johnson
Mansfield University
November 2012
The Rhetoric of Speeches: Colonel Slade’s Defense of a Good-Hearted Young Man
Rhetoric, most commonly used for persuasion, is often associated with speeches. There
are many speeches in the media that excellently demonstrate the use of rhetoric. Politicians use
speeches to present a platform, and actors make it their job to convey meaning through speech.
In short, anyone advocating an idea does so through speech, through rhetoric. Interestingly, some
of the finest speeches are fictional. For example, Al Pacino’s speech in the movie Scent of a
Woman is notable for the speaker’s remarkable presence and use of language. Scent of a Woman
is a movie that conveys powerful messages through the characters’ actions, and it ends with the
movie’s most stunning act of all: a speech that shows how people can affect one another and how
a well-constructed rhetorical act (even a fictional one) can sway audiences. The speech tests
audiences’ priorities and reshapes their ideas of education, character, and leadership in relation to
justice. It shows audiences how two people, faced with difficult trials, can learn to do what is
right despite hardships and how even one voice can make a difference. And it shows that human
beings have the freedom and therefore the responsibility to perceive situations in different lights.
The Story
Charlie Simms, an intelligent and good-hearted, though naïve, young man attends an all-
boys prep school. One night, he witnesses a prank being set up for the headmaster’s shiny new
Jaguar. After the prank occurs, the headmaster hears that Charlie and his “friend” George might
be able to identify the guilty parties. He threatens them both with expulsion if they do not tell,
but then he privately takes a new approach with Charlie: if Charlie does tell, the headmaster will
1
ensure him with a free ride to an Ivy League college (a dream come true for a Charlie, who is
dependent on financial aid).
The headmaster gives George and Charlie Thanksgiving weekend to think it over before
what is in all essence a trial. With the start of Thanksgiving weekend comes Charlie’s real
adventure: he takes on the job of looking after a blind war veteran in order to raise his plane fare
for Christmas break. Unfortunately, the blind veteran, Lieutenant Colonel Slade (Pacino), has his
own plans. He shanghaies Charlie into guiding him through a final tour of pleasures in New
York City: “stay at a first class hotel, eat an agreeable meal, drink a nice glass of wine, see my
big brother… and then make love to a terrific woman. After that, I’m going to lay down on my
big beautiful bed at the Waldorf and blow my brains out” (Pacino). Throughout the movie,
Charlie is faced with two dilemmas, both of which the Colonel expresses beautifully, “Do we
tell; do we not tell? Do we follow the rich boys’ code or not? Do we let this blind asshole die or
not?” (Pacino). Throughout the movie, Charlie guides the Colonel around New York, item by
item on the bucket list, while trying to decide how to stick to his honor. What is worse, the bribe
or the secret, the Colonel’s suicide or his miserable life?
During their time together, Charlie and the Colonel never fail to shock one another. The
Colonel’s senses of sound and smell are extraordinary, thus allowing him to tell how beautiful a
woman is by her perfume and voice and to teach one particular young woman how to tango.
Charlie, recognizing this, allows the Colonel to drive a Ferrari on back roads, hoping to give the
Colonel one more fond memory to hold onto. During their adventures, the Colonel tries to advise
Charlie – telling him to give in, telling him “conscience is dead” (Pacino). Charlie makes it clear,
however, that his conscience is unbreakable. Charlie’s greatest act of honor and compassion
arrives when he walks in on the Colonel preparing to kill himself. Charlie tries to persuade the
2
Colonel first with aggression, then physical force, then surrender, and finally with personal
connection. He helps the Colonel realize that he does not really want to die. The Colonel, either
because Charlie actually persuades him or because Charlie (and his uncommon character) means
something to him, gives up his attempted suicide. To sum up their experience, the Colonel says,
“All my life, I stood up to everyone and everything because it made me feel important – you do
it because you mean it. You got integrity, Charlie” (Pacino).
The Colonel gives Charlie a ride back to school, dropping him off at the edge of campus
and driving off. Charlie, tired and scared, takes his seat on the stage of the courtroom-like
auditorium and awaits his fate. During the headmaster’s opening speech to the full student body
that sits passively, Colonel Slade makes his way to Charlie’s side. With only brief introductions
as an interruption, the court proceeding begins. George avoids surrender at first but soon gives
in, naming his friends as possible suspects. Charlie carefully avoids naming anyone but fails to
properly defend himself – after all, who would take his word over the headmaster’s? The
headmaster decides to suggest that the Disciplinary Committee reward George for honorably
turning over the villains and expel Charlie for covering for them. In a burst of indignation, the
Colonel begins his defense of the singularly good-hearted young man.
This movie as a whole is a stunning example of the trials of life, accented with instances
of the extraordinary. The Colonel’s speech is the crowning moment of the movie, and it is one of
Pacino’s most touching and inspirational roles. In the speech, the Colonel focuses on three key
ideas – education, character, and leadership – and a close analysis of these ideas demonstrates
that, although fictional, the speech is an effective example of the powers of rhetoric and of the
power even one voice can have in matters of justice.
Education
3
The Colonel, rather than beginning with a summary of Charlie’s assets, makes a point of
calling the school out on its poor treatment of an innocent student. He knows that the school is
perfectly aware of Charlie’s good nature and feels no need to waste time explaining it. Instead,
he focuses on the school’s wrongdoings. Despite the fact Charlie is an excellent student (studies
hard and does work study), the headmaster threatens him, disregarding the fact he does not even
know for sure if Charlie can identify the pranksters at all. What does this say about the integrity
of the education system? The Colonel offers an answer. When the headmaster gives his opening
speech, explaining the reason for the assembly, he claims that it is to protect the integrity of the
school, which is know across the nation as a “cradle of leadership.” The headmaster feels the
need to defend the situation using this metaphor, and it demonstrates a carefully chosen use of
rhetoric. Rhetoric, essentially, is “the art of proving opposites” (Ramage 26). The Colonel’s
rhetoric proves to be stronger than the headmaster’s when he addresses the hypocrisy of a school
that claims to nurture great people but threatens the future of one truly decent person. He
deconstructs the headmaster’s metaphor and his definition of the situation, the school’s need to
weed out liars like Charlie, and he makes it clear that this whole scene can be viewed differently.
He says, “As I came in here, I heard those words: ‘cradle of leadership’ – well, when the bough
breaks, the cradle will fall, and it has fallen here” (Pacino). The Colonel uses the metaphor to
prove the point that a school (a cradle of leadership) will fall if the administration (the bough)
that supports it is compromised. He cleverly uses the headmaster’s own metaphor against him,
inferring that the headmaster – the bough supports the cradle of the school – has compromised
himself by bribing Charlie. He claims that by destroying Charlie’s future and rewarding George
for giving in, the school is undermining its own motto – it is causing its own fall.
4
After displaying the school’s faults, the Colonel presents a solution: allow Charlie to
continue his education. He does not put it so simply, though. Instead, he creates another
metaphor:
I have come to the crossroads in my life. I always knew what the right path was, without exception I knew, but I never took it. You know why? It was too damn hard! Now here’s Charlie. He’s come to the crossroads; he has chosen a path – it’s the right path; it’s a path made of principle that leads to character. Let him continue on his journey. You hold this boy’s future in your hands, committee – it’s a valuable future, believe me! Don’t destroy it – protect it, embrace it. It’s gonna make you proud one day, I promise you. (Pacino)
In this passage, the Colonel starts by comparing Charlie to himself in a short anecdote, and he
makes Charlie seem like the better man. This is similar to the earlier instance when he praised
Charlie for his integrity, “You do it because you mean it” (Pacino). This is a bold and brilliant
move: he makes a young man look more intelligent and good than an older and more
experienced one. The Colonel then presents the metaphor of a crossroads, a crossroads for which
school is supposed to prepare students. He claims he never took the right path but that Charlie
has taken the right one despite its hardship. This highlights Charlie’s value as a student and
member of society. He finishes this point by asking the Disciplinary Committee personally to
allow Charlie to continue down that right path toward character and by promising that Charlie’s
future is one worth protecting. The Colonel cleverly takes the responsibility out of Charlie’s
hands (for giving in to the headmaster’s bribe) and into the hands of the Committee (for
protecting a young boy’s “valuable” future).
The point of this scene is to persuade the school to keep Charlie rather than destroy his
future. Appropriately, the scene takes place in the auditorium of a school. It is important to make
note of this setting: it is an auditorium with tiered seating, portraits on the walls (probably former
headmasters) staring down at students as they walk in, and a stage with a mural of biblical theme
behind it that has the caption, “The place where people meet to seek the highest is holy ground”
5
(Pacino). Viewers, whether sitting in the scene or in front of their TV, can clearly see that
education is sacred on this “holy ground.” Also notice that the Colonel defends Charlie in front
of an assembly of teachers, administrators, and fellow students – not to mention movie viewers,
many of whom are (or once were) students like Charlie. Charlie is standing alone against this
compromised educational system, and the Colonel focuses on Charlie’s underdog status to target
the sympathies and concerns of his audience and get them to connect with Charlie’s dilemma. He
recognizes that education plays or has played a significant role in his audience members’ lives
and identities. Readymade identities, as defined by Ramage, are “prefabricated by others and are
on offer through the workplace, the marketplace, and the cultural space we occupy” (42). The
Colonel uses his audiences’ readymade identities as learners and teachers to persuade them of
Charlie’s worth. He asks the learners to admire and sympathize with him and the teachers to
“embrace” and “protect” him. Charlie is likely to lose this battle of integrity, and the Colonel
focuses on his excellence compared to the school’s poor treatment to emphasize that he deserves
to win.
Character
Colonel Slade, throughout his speech, emphasizes connections between education and
character, and he makes it clear that this whole situation is a question of character. It is important
to notice that, although the scene takes place in a school, the auditorium itself looks like a
courtroom. Like a courtroom, this is the place where character is measured and one soul’s future
is determined. At the beginning of the scene, the Colonel directly addresses this setting by
sarcastically asking if they are in a courtroom, to which the headmaster replies that it is the
closest the school could manage to one. The Colonel, without missing a beat, says he would like
people to swear in. The headmaster quickly counters that there are no oaths at the school and that
6
everyone is on his honor. The Colonel does not respond to this, but there is a pause just long
enough to make movie viewers think, “Wait…” If everyone is on his honor, then why is a public
court session necessary, and why is Charlie in this situation at all? If the headmaster had treated
Charlie as though he were on his honor, then he would have taken his word for it in the
beginning of the movie when Charlie claimed he could not identify the pranksters. Further, the
headmaster is clearly not on his honor: he is the one who bribes and then threatens Charlie with
his future over a prank, calling it a school (not personal) matter. With these simple sarcastic
remarks and a subtle pause in speech, the Colonel challenges the headmaster’s ethos – his status
of trust, knowledge/experience, reliability, and neutrality in the situation (Ramage 91). He forces
audience members, especially movie viewers who know the whole story, to wonder who has
character in this scene and who does not.
As made clear by the Colonel’s final plea for reason, Charlie has chosen a path “made of
principle that leads to character” (Pacino), and he has chosen it despite the fact it would be much
easier to turn in the pranksters. The Colonel esteems Charlie for this, and he ridicules the school
for rewarding the wrong boy. He says, “Well, gentlemen, when the shit hits the fan, some guys
run and some guys stay. Here’s Charlie facin’ the fire, and there’s George hidin’ in big daddy’s
pocket. And what are you doin’? You’re gonna reward George and destroy Charlie” (Pacino).
The Colonel praises Charlie by insulting George, and he questions the character of a school that
will reward the boy who sells his friends out and hides behind his rich father rather than the boy
who follows his conscience. He furthers his point by claiming that the school’s very spirit has
died with its loss of character: “you’re building a rat ship here – a vessel for sea-going snitches”
(Pacino). Again, the Colonel takes responsibility away from Charlie and hands it to the school.
7
He charges it with the creation of “sea-going snitches” because of its action against good
character (this hearing) and its lack of principle (the headmaster’s threat and bribe).
The Colonel counters his grave accusation with praise for Charlie: “This boy’s soul is
intact – it’s nonnegotiable – you know how I know? Someone here, and I’m not gonna say who,
offered to buy it, only Charlie here wasn’t selling” (Pacino). As with comparing Charlie to
George, the Colonel raises Charlie’s image by putting down that of someone else. The internal
jab is clearly meant for the headmaster, but no one in the scene but the Colonel, Charlie, and the
headmaster knows about the bribe. The others can probably guess, though, that when the Colonel
claims someone offered to buy Charlie’s soul, he means the headmaster not because the Colonel
makes any kind of gesture but rather because the headmaster overreacts. The Colonel questions
the headmaster’s character in a way that only three men can know for sure, but the headmaster
all too quickly defends himself and says that the Colonel is out of order (referring back to the
courtroom setting). While the rest of the audience may have paid more attention to the praise of
Charlie’s “intact” and “nonnegotiable” soul, the headmaster chooses to focus on the jab at him –
simply due to the way the Colonel presented his comment. When the headmaster calls the
Colonel out, we see a major turning point in the speech. The Colonel stands up and, asserting his
power over that of the headmaster, raises his voice above its typical projection, “Out of order?
I’ll show you out of order! You don’t know what out of order is, Mr. Trask. I’d show you, but
I’m too old, I’m too tired, I’m too fuckin’ blind. If I were the man I was five years ago, I’d take a
flamethrower to this place! ‘Out of order’ – who the hell d’you think you’re talking to?”
(Pacino). The Colonel may be a blue-collar man in a white-collar world, but he has seen enough
injustice to be angered by the headmaster’s attempt to overrule him. This burst of authority
shocks the entire audience. Until now, the Colonel has been sitting down, and his presence has
8
been assertive but calm. While he was sitting, he was, in his own words, “just getting warmed
up” (Pacino). Now things are serious; now the Colonel is truly angry. He is not only defending
Charlie’s character; he is also condemning the headmaster’s. Being a stranger to this academic
world but an experienced member of the adult world, the Colonel more than anyone else can
credibly argue the school’s cruel use of authority. Through this sudden assertion of power, the
Colonel indirectly supports his ethos by deconstructing that of the school – it is so disgusting to
him, he wishes he could burn it.
The Colonel drives his point of Charlie’s valuable future and character home by sharing
another anecdote. He compares his past experiences to this current one:
I have seen boys like these, younger than these, their arms torn out, their legs ripped off, but there is nothing like the sight of an amputated spirit – there is no prosthetic for that. You think you’re merely sending this splendid foot soldier back home to Oregon with his tail between his legs, but I say you are executing his soul! (Pacino)
Here, the Colonel imposes his readymade identity as well as his constructed identity as a Colonel
on the scene to paint a picture and prove a point. Constructed identities are those we choose
“based on available models and within the limits of that which we’ve been given” (Ramage 42-
3). The Colonel is a man of war, a status the military provided for him and he chose to build on.
He vividly describes horrors he has seen – forcing audience members to imagine scenes of war.
He then claims that as bad as that was, this is worse – he describes student-age soldiers in
physical torment, and then he calls Charlie a “splendid” foot soldier. This detailed metaphor is an
effective attempt to play on audience members’ knowledge of war. Everyone has been affected
by war in some way or another, but the Colonel has seen it first hand, and he shares the
experience to depict the horror of dismemberment and death – bodily and spiritual. This creates a
connection between Charlie, the other students, and any man that might be in charge of them. He
is asking the students to imagine having lost a limb, or (worse) a soul, and he is accusing the
9
school of being responsible for such a painful loss. In this situation, the Colonel takes on the
constructed identity (Ramage 42) of protector – he recognizes that he is in charge of Charlie.
Earlier in the movie, it had been the other way around – Charlie had saved the Colonel’s life, and
now the Colonel is returning the favor. The Colonel may be exaggerating the gravity of the
situation by equating expulsion with the death of Charlie’s soul, but this exaggeration is well
placed. After all, the headmaster claims in the beginning of the scene that the prank is a
“symptom of a sickness of society, a sickness which runs counter to the principles this school
was founded on” (Pacino). The headmaster’s statement is a petty exaggeration of his personal
embarrassment while the Colonel’s metaphor is an effective exaggeration of how important
education is in a person’s development of character.
Leadership
Slade’s final key idea in his speech is leadership, which he believes depends on education
and character. Unfortunately, “leadership” is often a dummy term and, according to Ramage, is
used as a “personification and exemplification of the dominant values and beliefs of the domain
within which [a particular leader] performs” (47). Ramage also claims that the success of leaders
is often measured according to worldly success (if they are successful, they must be leaders), and
he complains that describing a leader’s life as a repeatable formula reduces “human action to a
form of motion” (47-8). The Colonel addresses the faults with this term by avoiding a specific
formula. He does not suggest that all people should do what Charlie has done, and he does not
focus on the fact that Charlie is keeping a secret. Rather, he suggests that all people should share
Charlie’s motivation for what he did – honor and courage – and he focuses on the fact that
Charlie is not giving in to a bribe. The Colonel presents broad traits, not specific actions, as
guidelines for good leadership. His careful focus on Charlie’s positive motivation and the
10
school’s negative action is an excellent display of pathos and logos: the use of specific language
to embody the message and lend to presence, and the overall coherence of the message (Ramage
83). The Colonel illuminates certain points and down plays others to boost Charlie’s image as the
victim, not the villain; and he carefully connects the previous points of education and character
to leadership.
To illustrate his point about what makes a good leader, the Colonel first refers to
education. He says in the beginning of his speech, “If you think you’re preparing these minnows
for manhood, you better think again because I say you are killing the very spirit this institution
proclaims it instills” (Pacino). The spirit of the school is supposed to be character, strength, and
excellence, as described by the headmaster in the beginning of the scene. The Colonel questions
how good leaders can be created if the school breaks its own principles. He furthers his point
later by continuing the metaphor started by the headmaster’s boastful claim that the school is a
“cradle of leadership.” He had said the cradle has fallen due to a broken bough, and now he
continues his scolding accusation by saying, “Makers of men? Creators of leaders? Be careful
what kind of leaders you’re producing here” (Pacino). He warns the school administrators
personally to beware of what traits they are instilling in their students should this trial end poorly
for Charlie: the desire to take the easy way out, accept bribes, and sell someone else’s future to
buy their own.
The Colonel presents the finest point of his argument about leadership by referring to the
courtroom scene again. He says,
I don’t know if Charlie’s silence here today is right or wrong; I’m not a judge or jury. But I can tell you this: he won’t sell anybody out to buy his future! And that, my friends, is called integrity; that’s called courage; now that’s the stuff leaders should be made of! (Pacino)
11
The Colonel makes it clear that it does not matter if Charlie’s specific action is right or wrong
and that the point is that Charlie’s heart is in the right place. Referring back to the problems with
“leadership”, the Colonel focuses on Charlie’s integrity and courage – desirable principles not
specific to a certain time or place. People do not necessarily want leaders who refuse to deliver
guilty persons; but people do want leaders who demonstrate honor and bravery. The Colonel is
qualified to speak for Charlie’s principles because he has witnessed them first-hand: his desire to
do what is right (to not abandon a miserable old blind man to death, and to not give in to an
arrogant headmaster’s bribe). He admits that he cannot decide whether Charlie’s decision to
cover for the pranksters is right or wrong, but he proves that the verdict for Charlie’s expulsion
should involve more than the mere matter of this prank. The Colonel is blind, and this can be
seen as a metaphor for an ideal justice system. Justice is supposed to be blind, and so is the
Colonel. The Colonel, despite and perhaps because of his own regrets and mistakes, is the most
qualified person in the room to deal out judgment. Even though he is blind, he has seen both
sides of the argument for what they really are, and he understands the situation: Charlie’s future
has been threatened over a prank that has nothing to do with him, and Charlie has refused to give
in. The headmaster’s attitude supports the Colonel’s earlier remark that “conscience is dead,” but
Charlie’s attitude proves him wrong. The Colonel applies to the audience’s principles by
focusing not on what Charlie may have done wrong but what he has done right.
Concluding Remarks
Overall, Colonel Slade persuasively argues that Charlie is a good-hearted young man
who deserves to continue his education. Throughout the scene, he holds his audience of school
members and movie watchers captive with his excellent use of language and presence. Each and
every person watches and listens to his strong argument – he even startles them when he stands
12
up to assert his power and, indirectly, build his ethos. The disciplinary committee is persuaded
not only to allow Charlie to stay but also to remove any note whatsoever of the event from his
record so that it never comes back to haunt him. The entire student body erupts into applause at
this news, and the court case is over at last. The movie Scent of a Woman is about the crossing of
two lives: that of Lieutenant Colonel Slade and Charlie Simms. Charlie helps the Colonel regain
his appreciation for life, and the Colonel (in a spectacular finale to the movie) defends Charlie’s
right to his education and therefore his life. At first it may seem that the Colonel is simply
persuading the school to let Charlie stay, but it become apparent that he is doing far more than
that. He is defending Charlie as a student, a good person, and an integral and courageous future
leader. We use rhetoric every day of our lives: it is the art of how we choose to communicate
information. Studying a speech like this allows us to examine a carefully constructed specimen
of rhetoric. It allows us to analyze the aspects of rhetoric that are essential to everyday use:
identities, presence and coherence (ethos, pathos, logos), word choice, themes, metaphors, etc.
More importantly, it also allows us to examine how the trials of life two relatable characters face
can affect our views of issues like justice. Charlie and the Colonel change in order to help one
another – Charlie acts on his dormant courage, and the Colonel acts against his decided
pessimism – and this tests audiences’ ideas of right and wrong. The Colonel is a miserable old
blind man, but Charlie helps him; Charlie is in an underdog situation because of his secret, but
the Colonel helps him. The Colonel’s speech illustrates that justice is not always black and
white. Sometimes general traits are more important than specific behaviors. The adventure
Charlie and the Colonel have, and the friendship they create, demonstrates what the Colonel
explicitly explains in his speech: there is merit in facing the fire, and it is often easier when
someone is there to face it with you. The overarching idea here is that human beings have the
13
freedom to analyze situations in different lights and therefore, as the Colonel argues, have the
responsibility to do so.
14
Works Cited
Pacino, Al. Perf. Scent of a Woman. Dir. Martin Brest. Universal, 1992 (1998). DVD.
Ramage, John D. Rhetoric: A User’s Guide. New York: Pearson Longman, 2006. Print.
15