Elie Wiesel and Malala Yousafzai have received the Nobel Peace Prize for their humanitarian work. Elie Wiesel was a Holocaust survivor, and the writer of Night. Malala Yousafzai is commonly known for being shot by the Taliban as a young girl, but her mission is to give access to education to the millions of kids around the world who do not have the chance. Their acceptance speeches highlight the essence of their work. Their Nobel Lectures both contain rhetorical appeals; heavy usage of ethos and pathos appear in their work. While one lacks figurative language in comparison to the other, the two are still able to convey their message to the people. Malala Yousafzai and Elie Wiesel have organized their speeches similarly.
…show more content…
Wiesel uses many metaphors. For example, he compared the Holocaust to the Kingdom of Night (118, 120). Wiesel also alludes his younger self as the “a young Jewish boy” who asked many questions about how and why in the twentieth century those horrors could have taken place (118). Unlike Wiesel, Yousafzai lacked traditional figurative language. Instead her speech used repetition (which at times became redundant), strong word choice, and, the aforementioned rhetorical appeals. An example of a strong line from Yousafzai would be her purpose for fighting for her cause: “I tell my story not because it is unique, but because it is …show more content…
Although both wrote quality speeches, Wiesel’s speech was, in terms of rhetoric and figurative language, superior to Yousafzai’s speech. Both were able to reach the aims of their message, but unlike Yousafzai, Wiesel was able to utilize rhetoric and figurative language. In addition, Wiesel was straighter to the point, and avoided redundancy. But again, both speeches made their point quite clear. Elie Wiesel and Malala Yousafzai were both good people who did good things for the world; their speeches did not dictate whether they deserved the award because they already were deserving of the
Wiesel uses many metaphors. For example, he compared the Holocaust to the Kingdom of Night (118, 120). Wiesel also alludes his younger self as the “a young Jewish boy” who asked many questions about how and why in the twentieth century those horrors could have taken place (118). Unlike Wiesel, Yousafzai lacked traditional figurative language. Instead her speech used repetition (which at times became redundant), strong word choice, and, the aforementioned rhetorical appeals. An example of a strong line from Yousafzai would be her purpose for fighting for her cause: “I tell my story not because it is unique, but because it is …show more content…
Although both wrote quality speeches, Wiesel’s speech was, in terms of rhetoric and figurative language, superior to Yousafzai’s speech. Both were able to reach the aims of their message, but unlike Yousafzai, Wiesel was able to utilize rhetoric and figurative language. In addition, Wiesel was straighter to the point, and avoided redundancy. But again, both speeches made their point quite clear. Elie Wiesel and Malala Yousafzai were both good people who did good things for the world; their speeches did not dictate whether they deserved the award because they already were deserving of the