Lesson video

Hello, Miss Howard here.

Welcome to our fifth and final lesson of the rhetoric and motivation unit.

So we've explored Churchill, an iconic figure in British history, and his We Shall Fight on the Beaches speech in which he had the duty and responsibility to raise morale and ensure that morale was high for the British people.

Last lesson we explored Mahatma Gandhi and his speech, his Quit India speech where he demanded that India not only protest, but in a non-violent approach to protest, for Indian independence after years of being under British rule or Crown rule as it's sometimes regarded.

Today, we're going to continue to study that speech.

We're going to look particularly at how Gandhi appeals to his audience.

As we touched upon last lesson, the difficulty and the conflict at the time within India is something that we need to be considerate of, we need to be mindful of when we're looking at this speech.

We're going to think about how he uses that second half of the speech to motivate people, motivate his audience, the people of India, and how he uses rhetoric to do that.

We'll finish by having a think about why rhetoric so vital for a speech of this nature.

But for now, I need you to close down any distractions or conversations that you might have going on in the background or any apps if you know how to do so.

And for the lesson today, you'll need a pen and some paper to write on, find yourself a space where you know that you're not going to be distracted in any way.

And when you're ready, press play, and we'll get started with the lesson.

So in this lesson today, and our final lesson of the unit, we'll continue to study, Gandhi's Quit India speech, and try to understand how he managed exactly to empower an audience that may have not necessarily felt all that empowered at the time.

We'll consider how Gandhi outlined a clear purpose within his speech to the people of India in an attempt to unite them as one in a move towards peaceful protest.

We'll explore how this building of ethos was fundamental to putting the key messages of his speech across.

We'll start by considering this idea of rhetoric for motivation and peace hand in hand.

We'll consider how Gandhi uses the second part of his speech to motivate his audience.

We'll look back at his speech as a whole for our analysis of how Gandhi used rhetoric to motivate the people of India.

And then we'll close by thinking on that question: Why was rhetoric so vital for this speech as a whole? We return to our Aristotelian Triad to look at rhetoric and evaluate for ourselves to what extent we feel Gandhi has spoken with all three aspects of the rhetoric triad.

So, how much, how hard he works to demonstrate himself as credible and trustworthy, that he genuinely cares about a peaceful outcome for India and the freedom of India.

To what extent he builds in or incorporates logos within his speech.

So where does he sound logical, well-evidenced, that evidence of, kind of intellect, that he backs himself up, the proof behind his argument, that his way is the most effective way, that his non-violent approach to protest is the most effective way for India.

And we'll also think about to what extent he creates this pathos, that he evokes an emotional response from the audience.

That essentially, does he empower them? Does he leave them feeling motivated and empowered and in agreement with his way of thinking? Now in order to fully understand the big question that we're working towards today, we need to understand this word.

So the word vital means that if something is essential or necessary.

It's taken from the Latin word, vita, meaning life.

Before we look at the second half of the speech, what I'd like us to do is recap, using our notes from last time, the first half of Gandhi's speech.

So I've given you three statements here.

What I'd like you to do is finish the sentences.

So write out the sentences in full for me, and then finish them with your own ideas, using your notes from last time.

You may need these two words as a reminder, if you didn't note them down last time.

So we have Ahimsa, which are the principles of non-violent protest.

So if we're following Ahimsa, the rules of Ahimsa, it's the principles of non-violent protest.

It's essentially Gandhi's belief system.

And Sadhana, which is a way of accomplishing something or your key purpose.

So your Sadhana is your key purpose, your reason, your motivation.

Pause the video here, and then we'll go through some answers when you're done.

How did you get on? Brilliant work for managing to recall information from last lesson.

That's fantastic retrieval.

So let's have a look.

Gandhi opened the speech by sharing that his purpose was not for power, but for India's freedom, was the word that we're looking for there.

He then went on to state that a non-violent soldier of freedom does not look to gain anything for himself, but fights for the freedom of his country.

If you remember, he uses that anecdote, didn't he, as a non-violent soldier of freedom, that they don't look to seek any power, they don't covet power for themselves, but this idea that they look to fight for the freedom of the country.

So incredibly patriotic.

And then he acknowledged that Ahimsa wasn't perfect, but that it was essential when carrying out a peaceful protest.

So he did admit that there were flaws with Ahimsa, didn't he, he said about the imperfections of Ahimsa, but he also maintained that it was the only way in order to carry out protest in the right way.

And it's very much about that, of being the correct way to do things, which is why he described it as, you know, Britain's orderly withdrawal from India.

It's this idea of just being mutually respectful of other people that you might not necessarily agree with, is very much where Gandhi was talking from, that idea, that viewpoint in the first half of his speech.

Press pause now, if you want to add anything to your three answers to sum up what we looked at last time.

So in the second half of the Quit India movement, it's very much, we need to keep in mind, we need to remind ourselves of the context and who Gandhi was talking to at the time.

If we need to think about kind of motivation and peace, we need to think about who was he talking to.

So he decided not to address just Congress in the usual way that somebody at a movement kind of speech like this might do.

He said that he was addressing all of India, he was addressing the people of India.

Now that means that he's got essentially possibly two motives or two purposes here for his speech.

One is that he wants to ensure that he has the support of the people of India to carry out peaceful protest with a view to looking at freeing India.

So India undergoing a sense of freedom and liberation from colonialism and the Crown rule, so where Britain has control over Indian, in particular Indian trade.

He's also talking to the various groups of people that are currently in conflict within India itself.

So we have kind of groups of, and he refers to this in the second half of his speech, groups of, various religious groups that are really struggling to agree with one another.

And finding ways for them to share their views other than violence is the other key purpose of Gandhi's speech.

So it's worth remembering that his one purpose is looking at freedom of India from Crown rule.

The second purpose is looking at the conflicts within India at the time as well, and how he can speak to those people involved in such conflicts.

Before we start the second part of the speech, there are also two aspects within the speech that we need to look at to make sure that we have a full understanding of these, so that when we read the speech we understand what Gandhi is referring to.

This statement is taken from the second section that I'm going to read to you.

So he says, "I read Carlyle's 'French Revolution' while I was in prison, and Pandit Jawaharlal has told me something about the Russian revolution." So he makes two references to the idea of revolution.

Now revolution, and it's the French Revolution and the Russian revolution, or revolution generally, is the uprising, it's normally a violent protest, almost like a kind of a civil war.

It's almost like a war within the country where people try and overthrow the government.

If you remember last lesson, we looked at the word coup.

So it's a little bit along those lines, of people overthrowing the government because they're not happy with the way that the country is being run.

So he's saying here, well, I've read this book, this historical account of the French Revolution when I was in prison and Pandit Jawaharlal is the current prime minister of India at the time when Gandhi's talking.

So he's making reference to quite a well-respected man, quite a knowledgeable intellectual man that he's had conversations with, and he's told him about the Russian revolution.

So he's doing two things here, he's explaining how knowledgeable he is on, you know, kind of violent protest and what that looks like and what that has looked like in other countries.

He's also making reference to the fact that he knows and he has a professional relationship with, that he's met several times the prime minister of India at the time as well.

So this is really good for building logos and not only building logos but for building logos potentially to then be able to talk about peaceful protest.

If you need to pause the video and write down information about those two references that he makes and what he's talking about so that you understand the speech a little bit better before we get started, pause the video here.

And lastly, there are new words for us to learn within the second part of the speech, okay.

Once I've read each one out for you and let you know the meaning, what I'd like you to do is if you didn't know the word before, to pause the video and note down the word and what the word means in your own words, or you can try using it in a sentence.

Don't just copy down my definition, because if you write the definition in your own words, you're far more likely to understand it, but you're also far more likely to remember it when it crops up in the speech itself.

So let's see what we've got.

I'd like you to repeat the word back to me, just so that you're able to say the word, as well as listen to me say the word.

So, it's democracy, democracy.

Brilliant stuff.

So a democracy is a government where representatives are elected or voted into their roles.

So in Great Britain we have a democracy.

The British public are able to vote in their prime minister.

And so it's this idea that you have some say in the way that the country you live in is run.

It builds as close as we can get to a sense of equality.

Imperialism, imperialism.

Okay, so imperialism is a state where the country extends their power through either colonisation, so taking ownership of other countries, or by force.

So an example of this is the British Empire and the fact that they through colonisation acquired other countries over the British rule, India included.

Next word, valour, valour.

Okay, so valour is something that Churchill made reference to if you remember, and it means great courage in the face of danger, usually battle.

So we're usually talking in a military sense if we're using the word valour, but this idea of great courage, particularly in the face of danger.

Lastly, purge, purge.

Fantastic stuff.

It's a nice word to say, isn't it? Purge is to get rid of or remove something.

Now we're normally talking figurative if we say purge, rather than literally.

So you wouldn't say, you know, I purged a stain off the carpet, normally, if you got rid of or removed something.

We're usually talking about something related to ourselves, so you might purge yourself of sin, or purge yourself of sadness, or something like that.

It's this idea of cleansing yourself and getting rid of something through ridding yourself of it, okay.

Pause the video here if you didn't know any of those.

Any of the words that you don't know, write them down and have a go at either using them in a sentence or writing your own definition of the word.

Okay, so as I read the speech through to you, what I'd like you to do is make notes on these three aspects.

Now if you need to pause the video, as I read through the speech, that's absolutely fine.

If you need to listen to the speech more than once, also absolutely fine.

I will remind you at the end as well, just to pause the video so that you've got time to put your notes together, okay? I'd like you to make notes on these three areas.

What are the top three key messages? How is this section different to the opening? So, different to the first part that we looked at.

And how would the audience feel as a result of listening to this speech? "I believe that in the history of the world, there has not been a more genuinely democratic struggle for freedom than ours.

I read Carlyle's 'French Revolution' while I was in prison, and Pandit Jawaharlal has told me something about the Russian revolution, but it is my conviction that inasmuch as these struggles were fought with the weapon of violence, they failed to realise the democratic ideal.

In the democracy which I have envisaged, a democracy established by non-violence, there will be equal freedom for all.

Everybody will be his own master.

It is to join a struggle for such democracy that I invite you today.

Once you realise this you'll forget the differences between the Hindus and Muslims, and think of yourselves as Indians only, engaged in the common struggle for independence.

Then, there is the question of your attitude towards the British.

I have noticed that there is hatred towards the British among the people.

The people say they are disgusted with their behaviour.

The people make no distinction between British imperialism and the British people.

To them, the two are one.

This hatred would even make them welcome the Japanese.

It is most dangerous.

It means that they will exchange one slavery for another.

We must get rid of this feeling.

Our quarrel is not with the British people, we fight their imperialism.

The proposal for the withdrawal of British power did not come out of anger.

It came to enable India to play its part at the present critical juncture.

It is not a happy position for a big country like India to be merely helping with money and material obtained willy-nilly from her, while the United Nations are conducting the war.

We cannot evoke the true spirit of sacrifice and valour, so long as we are not free.

I know the British government will not be able to withhold freedom from us when we have made enough self-sacrifice.

We must, therefore, purge ourselves of hatred.

Speaking for myself, I can say I've never felt any hatred.

As a matter of fact, I feel myself to be a greater friend of the British now than ever before.

One reason is that they are today in distress.

My very friendship, therefore, demands that I should try to save them from their mistakes.

As I view the situation, they are on the brink of an abyss.

It, therefore, becomes my duty to warn them of their danger even though it may, for the time being, anger them to the point of cutting off the friendly hand that is stretched out to help them.

People may laugh, nevertheless, that is my claim.

At a time when I may have to launch the biggest struggle of my life, I may not harbour hatred against anybody." Pause the video here and add to your notes, and we'll go through some of the ideas that you might have as a result of listening to the speech.

Don't forget, you can always go back in the video and listen to me read it again, and stop at various points to make notes as well.

So let's see some of the ideas that you might have.

Don't worry too much if your notes are different, cause there's lots to talk about in this speech.

Your notes could have included these ideas.

So as far as the key purposes of the speech, well, Gandhi clearly believes that democracy would be best for India.

He notes, doesn't he, and he builds a sense of logos using the French Revolution and the idea of the Russian revolution, the discussions that he's had around that.

But he does very much say, he says, "it is my conviction", yeah, that democracy would be best.

And he says, I believe, yeah? He also explains that hatred is holding back change in his opinion, in India.

So this idea of hatred of one another, or hatred of the British people, as a result is holding them back from moving forward towards freedom.

He also outlines that freedom will only be possible through peaceful protest.

And that's very much taken from the earlier part, isn't it, where we saw that before in the opening section.

Now this section of the speech is different, I would argue, for many reasons, and these are some of the ones that you might have had.

So, well Gandhi shares his views a lot more on key issues in this section.

He outlines that he disagrees with the idea of revolution as a result of seeking a democracy.

So he explains that, well it's not really a democracy if you've had to argue for equality for all through violence.

So if you're trying to establish equality and freedom for everybody, but then you've taken control or overthrown or taken away somebody's power in order to do it, is it actually a democracy? Which I think is quite interesting.

So he shares a lot of his kind of key ideas in maybe a slightly more brave way in this section than in the first section where he's building ethos and he's gaining the trust of the crowd very much.

He also speaks directly to the audience at several points, but a great deal on that final closing of the speech itself.

He also says, slightly earlier on, that he says, "It is to join the struggle for such democracy that I invite you today.

And, once you realise this, you will forget the differences between the Hindus and the Muslims think of yourselves as Indians only." So all of this direct address, and he warns the public later on of the danger of hatred and anger.

He uses himself as an example when he says, I've never hated anyone, essentially.

So this is, this feels like, the second half of the speech feels like there's far more honesty.

And his tone is quite kind of frank and open and honest with the people of India.

So the audience might, well they might react in several ways.

They might understand that Gandhi does not support violence.

He repeatedly comes back to that, doesn't he? And he says that, he uses that figurative language, "these struggles were fought with the weapon of violence, they failed to recognise the democratic ideal." So he will not support violence, even if it means it leads to freedom.

He doesn't feel that it's the right way to go about it.

They might support democracy as an effective alternative to the imperialism that they're currently living under.

So it might be the fact that a great deal of the Indian public were looking for an alternative to the current situation of the Crown rule and not really knowing what the alternative would be, other than, kind of conflict and violence.

They might look to reduce their violent actions or protests in India at the time.

He asks them, doesn't he, and says, "think of yourselves as Indians only, engaged in a common struggle for independence." So he provides an alternative.

He provides a way of doing so without resorting to violence.

So let's have a think about this question.

How does he use rhetoric to motivate the people of India, to move them to make the right decisions? We're going to look at this section of the speech in particular, the second part, the start of the second part, to think about how he uses the rhetoric within this particular part to motivate the people in India.

So first of all, he builds a really strong sense of logos, doesn't he, by casually referring to the Indian prime minister and the conversations he's had with him and making reference to the fact that he's well-read.

So he's explaining, I've seen the counter argument, I've seen the possibility of revolution, but it doesn't work, it won't work for us.

He says it and follows it up with, "it is my conviction".

So he's really, he's giving key examples here.

Some anecdotal evidence to back up his argument is the proof of his argument, that he's looked at alternatives and they don't work as well.

He also says, "It is my conviction that in as much as these struggles were fought with the weapon of violence, they fail to recognise the democratic ideal." So that figurative language, "the weapon of violence", and he also says, and he repeats this several times, I think it's two or three, with that, throughout the entire speech, "my conviction".

So he makes his belief system very clear here, but that figurative language of "the weapon of violence", that revolution would be a weapon of violence.

And it's not necessarily the way he wants to go down at all.

This statement is really powerful, I think.

It's really, really emotive because it's what the audience that he's speaking to at the time will really look for.

This is their dream, the ideal.

"Everyone will be his own master." And that word master is really emotive at the time for the context of India.

You will have had a great deal of people enslaved through the colonisation as a rule.

They won't have necessarily felt as though they have a great deal of freedom or independence.

And so using that word of being "your own master" instead of having a master would be really, really emotive for the people that he was talking to.

They would really buy into that ideal, that dream of being their own master, of having that level of freedom.

He directly addresses the audience, "I invite you today, once you realise that you will forget the differences between the Hindus and Muslims and think of yourselves as Indians only." Now here with this repeated use of direct address, he also provides this kind of dialysis here of, you'll forget the differences between Hindus and Muslims. So you won't view yourself as one group or another, instead "think of yourselves as Indians only engaged for the common struggle of independence".

So he provides them with an ideal alternative, that instead of viewing themselves as particular groups conflicting against each other.

So let's have a look and pause here and see if we can answer these questions.

Have a go? Are they true, the statements, or are they false? How did you get on? Let's have a look.

Gandhi uses logos to establish why his views are correct? Yes, definitely.

He explains, doesn't he? I've read the counter argument and I don't buy into it.

I've read the idea of revolution.

I don't feel that it's the best option for us.

Gandhi uses personal pronouns to involve the audience in protest.

Well no, I'd say that his collective nouns very much do that to involve the audience rather than personal pronouns.

And the last one is true.

Gandhi uses direct address to convince the audience to peacefully protest.

When he says, "I invite you", yeah, "think of yourselves as only Indians".

So let's have a look at our question.

How did Gandhi use rhetoric to motivate the people of India? All right, we're going to have a look at how we would write an analysis of this speech as a whole.

We're going to use what, how, why? So we're going to, I'm going to talk you through this step by step and build this into a really nice detailed analysis of the speech.

What I want you to do first of all, is pause the video and write down that question at the top of the screen.

How does Gandhi motivate the people of India to protest peacefully? Pause here, press play when you've written it down.

Okay, so we're going to come back to this slide in a minute to help you in forming your ideas, but essentially, I'm going to show you an example of somebody using what, how, why.

So what rhetorical device has been used? How would it motivate the audience? And why would it be effective? That's what we're looking out for.

So let's have a look at an example first of all.

How somebody has used these three stages in action.

Okay, so let's talk through this and have a look, shall we? Gandhi employs, that's a nice word employs the use of, so instead of just uses.

Gandhi employs the use of personal pronouns in the line, "but it is my conviction".

This is use of my, yeah, it very much establishes his beliefs there, doesn't it.

Let's have a look.

And to build ethos, well done, with the crowd.

Sharing his beliefs would be effective because they would recognise that peaceful protest is something he feels very strongly about.

Yes, they've considered the audience's reaction there, haven't they? And the fact that because he believes in it so strongly, that would draw them in.

And because he talked so passionately about it when he's building that ethos, it would make them more likely to agree with him that, because it's something that clearly he's so passionate about.

This is also evident, that's really nice, this is also evident when he uses direct address.

So they've spotted the what there, his direct address.

What rhetorical device has been used? To say, "It is to join a struggle for such democracy that I invite you today." That's really nice.

So they've got evidence from the speech itself to support their ideas, they've pretty backed themselves up.

This helps to motivate the crowd.

So then there's their how.

This motivates the crowd, to motivate the crowd to take action and be a part of a challenging task to make India more democratic.

Very nice.

So this idea of being invited directly makes them feel quite valued, doesn't it, makes them feel as though he's speaking to them on a personal level.

This use of direct address, again, they've established what's been used, what device, is used later on to state, "think of yourselves as Indians only".

So they back themselves up with the quotation.

Now notice they've used direct address, as they've identified that twice.

Now that's absolutely fine.

You can do that.

Don't feel that you need to spot three different devices.

If it's something that you want to talk about in a different way, how it's used in a different way, as let's say if this person does that, then that's absolutely fine.

Let's have a look.

Direct address is used again later on to state, "think of yourselves as Indians only" to encourage the people of India to stop such violent acts of racism and join together to move India forward peacefully.

Oh, definitely, they're saying something very different there, aren't they? So the first was about kind of motivating the crowd to take action, and "invite you" to make them feel, kind of, like I'm saying, you could say to make them feel valued there, couldn't you.

And then this use of direct address is all about kind of uniting the peoples of India together so that they can move forward peacefully instead of having these particular groups in conflict with one another.

So that's absolutely fine.

If you're saying different things, but you've identified the same rhetorical device later on, that's absolutely fine.

They've also included some of that ethos.

Maybe they could have spotted where he makes use of logos or pathos.

So they might've included something around his reading and that counter argument, maybe, but it's a nice well-structured example for you to have a look at there.

So pause the video here and have a go at answering that question.

Now you can use your notes from last lesson as well as this lesson.

If you need to have a look at any particular quotations, you might want to skip back and have a look at the different examples that we've pulled out, or you can have a look at the example again to help you out.

Remember that what, how, why stage of your analysis.

So what rhetorical device has been used? How does it act to motivate the crowd, to motivate the audience? Why has Gandhi used it in order to move towards peaceful protests, okay? Pause the video, press play when you're done.

Fantastic work today.

Writing analysis is really, really challenging, but actually incredibly rewarding because it allows you to really focus on the detail of the speeches in such a meticulous way.

It's almost like shining a microscope glass over it.

So well done.

Fantastic effort today.

So let's just finish up by thinking about this question.

Why was the use of rhetoric vital for this speech? Why did Gandhi focus so much on using rhetoric in order to speak to the crowd, at such an unstable maybe kind of conflicting time from your overall? Well, I'd argue that rhetoric is vital for this type of speech, because when you're trying to bring somebody together or a group of people together that don't necessarily agree with everything that's either happening or agree with everything you say, rhetoric is a fantastic tool for that.

Rhetoric enables you to not only build a really strong sense of trust with an audience who might not necessarily come to hear you and agree with everything you're saying, but it also enables you to put you in a position, like Gandhi, to build on a sense of pathos, that direct address, and really pulling the audience in to say, "I invite you" is really powerful for a situation like this because he's presenting an alternative when a country is in a point of conflict or it's a point of maybe discontent, and so not being very happy with the current situation.

It can be quite easy to not have alternatives to look to, to not know what the better option is, but just to be unhappy with the current situation.

And Gandhi uses rhetoric to not only motivate the crowd, but provide them with an alternative of this idea of democracy that makes it sound like a dream that they so desperately need when he says that statement, "Everyone can be their own master." Incredible.

I hope you've had a fantastic lesson today and I hope you've enjoyed the unit as a whole.

I've been really interested and excited to share these two key figures with you.

And I strongly recommend that you go and look them up and read a little bit more into their history because they're both very, very interesting people, both Churchill and Gandhi respectively.

If you'd like to, please ask your parent or carer to share your work on Instagram, Facebook, or Twitter tagging @OakNational and #LearnwithOak.

I would love to see your detailed analysis of this speech.

And that's the end of not only the lesson, but the unit as a whole.

I hope you've had an incredible journey learning along with me about these two very important figures within history, and their fantastic use of rhetoric in order to convince people in their own respective ways what was a very difficult time for the people that they were addressing? And you've also created a fantastic piece of analysis and kind of touched upon that practise last time.

But it's really building your knowledge of how to demonstrate your analysis and demonstrate your understanding of the text within English.

So you've worked really hard around that in this particular unit.

So give yourself a giant pat on the back.

And I'd like you to do two things for me.

The first one is to write down three things that you've learned across the unit as a whole.

So have a look at your work and your notes from the last five lessons.

And I'll be really interested to see what you took away from that, or what you think were the most important elements that you've learned there.

The second thing I'd like you to do is complete the short quiz.

I'm really interested to see how much you've learned.

Take care, and I'll see you soon.