What Are Some of the Ideas Found in the Speeches Essay Example

carefully sets the scene by describing – in almost simplistic terms – the idea of what a novel or literature is. She does this firstly by drawing upon a personal anecdote about her 5 year old daughters ‘eternal breakfast’ play and then by giving examples of what she believes a novel is not e.g. novels are not sociological textbooks, novels are not political tracts and novels are not how-to books.

Atwood then describes the new age in which literature has been introduced into, “we live in an age of not only gender crossover but of genre crossover, so you can throw all of the above into the cauldron and stir”, and this provides more options for women to hold the power instead of men. According to Atwood, the Women’s Movement provided a number of benefits to literature, specifically the expansion of the territory available to writers; women could now get all the “juicy parts” that had before been occupied by man. However, she mentions that there was also a tendency to “cookie cut” – to polarize morality by gender and represent women as intrinsically good, and men as bad. This allowed women characters to rebel.

The key point of both Atwood and Suu Kyi speeches is that they both try to redefine the identity of females and their role in society. Atwood tries to show that women have the ability to play the man’s role and Suu Kyi believes that women can teach men how to conduct themselves in a non-violent manner in problematic situations e.g. war.

In Aung San Suu Kyi’s speech, she speaks with deep conviction regarding the lack of freedom that women suffer. Her speech

focuses on the role of women in government, society and politics to “struggle for justice and peace” in the world. She expresses her belief that this role should be centered on the biological qualities women possess and their dedication to “nurturing, protecting and caring for the young and the old”. These qualities ‘imposed on’ women enable them to play an important role in inciting political and social change. She further more reduces the contribution of men by using negative emotive language – “patronizing behaviour or exploitation” and ”patriarchal domination and degradation”.

She brings about the hardships women have had to suffer as consequences for the men’s actions; the consequences are the women having to “face the harsh challenges of the world outside while continuing to discharge their duties within the home”.

Suu Kyi provides political statistics to add credibility to her argument by stating that “14 out of the 485 MPs elected in 1990 were women” and that “no war was ever started by women”. While this last point may not be 100% true, it makes the audience question the real contribution men make to society other than protection and highlights the lack of female representatives in Burma. She makes the audience question themselves further with the use of rhetorical questions. For example, “But is this really a weakness? Could it not be infact a strength? Suu Kyi further argues this point of men’s contribution by implying that the home is the women’s domain/safe place and yet men can still “subject cruelty within the heart of the family”.

Her last argument is that “the education and empowerment of women throughout the world cannot fail to result in a

more caring, tolerant, just and peaceful life for all” she uses similes to illustrate how women should use their biological qualities to nurture loved ones, “tender as mothers nursing their newly born, brave as lionesses defending their young”.

Both Atwood and Suu Kyi address the issue of equality for women, Atwood uses anecdotes and personal references to convey her message of women in literature, whilst Suu Kyi sticks to facts. Atwood’s speech, in my opinion, would have a more positive impact on the contemporary audience through her use of effective arguments, personal anecdotes, colloquialism as well as drawing from literary examples. Both Atwood and Suu Kyi speeches, with their outspoken ideas and reception, will remain relevant within our changing society regardless of altering values.