Clint Eastwood and Kurt Vonnegut

The speeches we have viewed in class contain both strengths and weaknesses.  One of the speeches that I did not find very effective was Kurt Vonnegut’s speech.  Although I considered Kurt Vonnegut to have a great amount of ethos (I have read one of his books and found it both amusing and enlightening), I had trouble deciphering what he was trying to convey through his speech due to his lack of pathos.  I greatly enjoyed his humor and thought he made several interesting points, but there was no easily discernible message.  The speech I found the most effective was Clint Eastwood’s speech at the Republican National Convention.  Although he committed a few fallacies, such as belittling the opponent, Clint Eastwood’s address had a great amount of logos while Kurt Vonnegut’s did not.  Clint Eastwood’s speech was funny and straightforward.  It was easy to see whom he supported and whom he did not.  Eastwood also has a lot of ethos with almost everyone, so he received much support from the audience.  In my opinion, it is best to have a balance of logos, ethos, and pathos in order to have the best effect on one’s audience.