A texts coherent use of form and language can produce an integrated whole in

terms of meaning and value.

Only a text with a congruence of form, features and ideological representation is
capable of becoming an immovable, unified entity which can not merely resist
the unstoppable force of time but transcend the confines of eras by continuing to
resonate with newer audiences within differing contexts.
Texts, such as
speeches, achieve this through the coherent use of form and language which
produces a coalesced whole in terms of meaning and value. Thus, time can be
perceived as feeble against such exceptionally written forms of literature whose
rhetoric and technical proficiency coupled with its universal appeal continue to
prevail. The speeches Spotty-Handed Villainesses by Margret Atwood and
Faith, Hope and Reconciliation by Faith Brandler, epitomise how an
amalgamation of structural form, language, portrayal of ideologies and discourse
as well as the exploration of the human condition can elevate a given text to
immense heights capable of rivalling times interminable vigour. Both texts reflect
a textual integrity which is not confined to canonic works of literature and which,
furthermore, have successfully intertwined the above aspects with the art of
rhetoric and the representation of ethos, logos and pathos in an Aristotelian
Model. Although differing in their ideologies, the speeches address two key
aspects of the human condition which have faced humanity for incalculable
centuries; equality between both genders and race.
All composers are inevitably vulnerable to their surrounding, personal context.
While a text is prone to reflect the context of the individual whose hand has
created it, it is solely bound to such time frames only in accordance with its level
of textual and structural integrity. Margret Atwoods Spotty-Handed
Villainesses, being an Epideictic and almost commemorative speech on
equality, accrues enough integrity in relation to not simply its technical form but
moreover its exploration of meaning and value to exceed its immediate context,
thus resonating in the modern world. Atwoods use of literary allusions adds a
layer of textual integrity that transcends the speechs kairos but also reinforces
the ideological discourse. This speech was delivered in 1994 at the time of third
wave feminism, which in certain ways was a response to the reaction of second
wave feminism in the 1960s. Somewhat paradoxically, Atwood supports
feminism while, at the same time, criticises extremist, feminist views.
Atwood establishes the purpose of the speech- the portrayal of evil women and
what literature as a whole encompasses- immediately in the exordium by
introducing her title and subtitle in a very straight forward manner which not
only appeals to logos but exemplifies the limning of the speech. Atwood proves
her literary proficiency through the use of tropes, allusions, ironic polyvocality
and considerable wit which, in combination with the overall conversational tone
of the speech, conveys her ideologies and discourse on a personal level that
connects with the audience, thus creating further textual and structural integrity.
The sudden switch from logos to ethos and return to the Quintilian model seen in
the following personal, ironic, anecdote of a childrens rhyme, juxtaposes the
identification of feminist critique on the schism between Angel/Whore. Atwood
addresses the feminine noun Villainesses with a series of anaphoric ellipses in
the line Spot as in guilt, spot as in blood, spot as in out, damned, which, being
a literary allusion to Lady Macbeth, creates textual integrity. In this section she
uses polyvocality to incite life to the speech and stimulate the audiences
dialogic involvement. Atwood continues by raising a series of complex key
issues, concerns and questions in regards to the representation of women
throughout literature through use of hypophora. She then counters this, with an

effect of bathos, by establishing a connection with the audience through the use
of the personal anecdote of her daughters breakfast presentation.
One of the significant elements of the speeches textual integrity, unity and
coherence is the incorporation of a range of techniques including motifs,
symbolism, allusions and so on. This use of anecdotes, in particular the motif of
the eternal breakfast, depicts Atwoods central system of reasoning with the
audience by alternating between logos and ethos which essentially becomes a
touchstone for connecting with reality. The focal motif can, moreover, be viewed
as one of the integral concept which fortifies the speeches textual and structural
integrity as it lends itself to multiple ironic literary references and allusion.
Atwood utilises humour in combination with theology to reinforce the fact that
flaws are innately human, as seen when she states, God- who is among other
things, an author- is just as enamoured of character flaws and dire plots as we
human writers are. In combination with symbolic motifs and both literary and
biblical allusions, Atwood incorporates extended colloquialism as seen in the line,
every artists is, among other things, a con-artist, antithesis when she states,
By indirection we find direction, a significant number of humorous similes, for
example like wrestling a greased pig in the dark, and the apostrophe of,
Women characters arise! The peroration concludes with the use of trope and a
pronouncement to women to embrace the evil of their inner Shadow (a Jungian
concept) which, in turn, reinforces the layers of imagery and allusions found
within the speech. The latter, in combination with amplification, neologisms,
clichs and dialogism, cement the speech within an amalgamation of both
literary and rhetoric techniques which ensures that meaning and value are if
anything, intensified. She thus proves that the clever use of an extensive array of
techniques does not stifle meaning but enhances it as the combination of form,
language, value and meaning create not only an integrated whole, but enough
structural and textual integrity capable of withstanding times inevitably
destructive vigour.
Speeches are inevitably bound to the context in which they were created.
However through the integrated use of meaning, form and language, particular
speeches are able to precede the functionality of purpose and be interpreted as
powerful representations of the human condition, thus becoming accessible to
wider audiences. Faith Brandlers Faith, Hope and Reconciliation is one such text
as it represents universal ideologies in harmony with a number of rhetoric and
literary devices, giving the speech inherent value. Brandler was an eminent
aboriginal activist, instrumental in the 1966 referendum, and awarded the Order
of Australia in 1984 for advancing the cause for Aboriginal rights. She used the
keiros, an indigenous reconciliation convention, to inspire and motivate the
concurring opinions of the predominantly indigenous people within the audience
to move the process of reconciliation forward with a little more speed.
Brandler epitomises how the use of insightful techniques, rhetorical devices and
a prominent, influential discourse coalesce to create a connection between the
speaker and audience which is both challenging and satisfying. An informal,
ironic tone and the egalitarian discourse is directly established through the title
Faith, Hope and Reconciliation, which is not only a pun on her name but also on
the three Christian virtues; faith, hope and charity. The keiros and audience are
acknowledged within the exordium as Brandler highlights her standing as an
Indigenous activist through personal anecdotes, I was here before, creating
ethos. The informal tone which lines the speech is highlighted in this section
through the use of the person pronouns I and you, as well as the ellipsis of
It. Furthermore, the negative tone is clearly illustrated through the connotation

of module, the accumulation of the anaphoric conjunctions, and then, as well

as the amplification of terrible. Brandler cleverly begins to appeal to paths
through the abstract nouns, shame and anger, and the pause, adding to the
emotional intensity. This emotional intensity is one of the key concepts which
enhances the speeches textual integrity and accessibility. Brandler ensures that
such intensity is maintained throughout the speech by implementing a number
of differing techniques and alternating between pathos and ethos. Examples of
such include; an amplification of millions, the use of the hyperbole mass
murder, the alliteration of fs, bs, and ps which create aural imagery and a
strong coherent rebuttal, as well as the appeal to the ethos of the next
generation in you and younger.
In combination with the above techniques, Brandler utilises zoomorphism,
biblical and ironic allusions, clichs, juxtapositions and rhetoric questions to
amplify the speeches meaning and value, thus carving further textual integrity
into an already masterful piece of rhetoric. Through the zoomorphic horse-racing
analogy, Brandler takes the higher moral ground by representing the moral
values of the opponents of reconciliation as animals, the classic Cartesian
dualism, in a pejorative manner. A number of biblical allusions are incorporated
within the speech including not only the title but the lines, in the name of
creation, brave actions to combat the mining companiesandIt can move
mountains. Subtle, ironic allusions of to the youth present, and the not so
young, ask not what is in it for me, but what is in it for us, and Its time, are
also blended throughout the speech. Brandler utilises clichs and colloquial
metaphors to not only strengthen the link between herself and the audience but
also maintain the overall informal tone of the speech. Examples of this are
illustrated in the lines, working together, set in stone, the task is yet to be
tackled, not handed on a platter, and put on the back burner. To really
emphasis the speeches purpose, numerous juxtaposition are applied as seen
when Brandler states,lightening the burden of the terrible baggage, and, They
are chained in their stubbornness, but we are free. Finally, the last key
technique employed by Brandler is the use of rhetoric questions which compel
the audience to contemplate what is being said. Although such questions are
seen in the lines, Why is it so hard to find our commonalities?and Friends,
what is reconciliation about?, the most significant rhetoric questions are utilised
in the final line of the peroration when Brandler links pathos with ethos to create
an overall unified idealism and a sense of urgency; If not now, when? Is not us,
who? It is clear that Brandlers effective use of an array of techniques and the
art of rhetoric have fused to create a platform which elevates the speeches
meaning and value, textual and structural integrity, as well as its accessibility
and relevance to modern audiences.
Texts are created to portray specific values which aim to inspire and represent an
insight into the human condition. However, coherent concepts, revelations and
urgent prerogatives are useless without the implementation and unification of
form and language that fashion the indispensable power of textual and structural
integrity to overcome the confines of context. The speeches Spotty Handed
Villianesses and Faith, Hope and Reconciliation can both be regarded as an
integrated whole due to the creators coherent use of language, form and unifying
concepts.