Argumentative strategies in the epideictic discourse of Elie Wiesel

Abstract

The article presents the various rhetorical strategies used by Elie Wiesel in arguing his own position in a double dialogue: first with the audience, and indirectly with decision-making forces worldwide, secondly, with history. With discretion, but at the same time with argumentative force, he brings before the public the image of the suffering he experienced directly in the concentration camps and, constantly returning to the theme of people’s indifference towards it, he expresses his hope that the said experience will not be repeated in the future. He succeeds in persuading the audience and at the same time impressing them deeply both through various types of discernible arguments and through rhetorical strategies conducted with sophistication, discretion and detachment. His inclusion in Simon Sebag Montefiore’s anthology to which I have constantly referred to (Speeches that changed the world) is fully justified: the well-articulated, balanced argumentation, through the visible exploitation of ethical and affective resources, cannot, and it should not be left without echo in front of the two types of public to which it was addressed (contemporary and timeless).

Keywords

• credibility of the orator
• logical arguments
• quasi-logical arguments
• ethical arguments
• emotional arguments
• argumentative strategies