So here are a couple of facts about me:
- I’m a huge sucker for a well-written speech.
(this is a huge reason why I chose to pursue a Bachelor’s degree in Rhetorical Communication Arts) - I absolutely love Malala Yousafzai.
(but SERIOUSLY, she’s incredible)
Keeping these things in mind, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that I’m a huge fan of Malala Yousafzai’s poignant speech to the United Nations in July of 2013. If you’re not familiar with this address, you’re not alone. While, at this point, most people have a general idea of who Malala is and have heard details of her rise to international fame, most have never seen or even heard about this amazing moment at the UN. This speech essentially marked Malala’s introduction to the world stage. Perhaps it’s the Communication Arts scholar in me, but I believe a speech this important deserves to be analyzed on a deeper level, so I spent some time writing a rhetorical criticism of the speech.
Side note: For those unfamiliar with academic Communication Arts terminology, “rhetorical criticism,” which I engage in for the purposes of this blog post, is not rooted in being “critical” in the cruel/rude definition of the word, but rather in “illuminating and evaluating rhetorical texts.”
Watch the address here before reading on:
Introduction
“Today it is an honor for me to be speaking again after a long time,” announced Malala Yousafzai with a clear, determined voice as she began her address to the UN general assembly on July 12th , 2013 – her sixteenth birthday.
Indeed, it had been a long time since she had made a prominent address to a group of people. The last time she had done so had been before she had been shot in the head by the Taliban in October of 2012 and had only narrowly escaped with her life. “She is lucky to be alive,” Dr. Dave Rosser, the medical director of University Hospitals in Birmingham, UK, told reporters (Brumfield et al). Members of the Taliban had searched Malala out in an attempt to kill her after learning that she had been speaking out against their violent, oppressive actions in her home country of Pakistan. She was not going to allow their violence to silence her, however, and with praise of her bravery appearing from all corners of the world, Malala defiantly spoke on what would be known as the very first “Malala Day (Brumfield et al).”
Malala calls upon the world to be agents of change, but she makes a point to address world leaders and girls specifically, and although she never explicitly addresses them, Malala also speaks to the Taliban with this speech. Malala uses a narrative of redemption, with the Taliban depicted as the villains of the plot and herself and her supporters as a resilient family of heroines, in order to show terrorists and the world that she not a victim, but a champion against their violence. Her continued strength, despite their aim to silence her, works as an attempt to scare the Taliban into backing down, while simultaneously empowering those with the ability to make change, namely UN leaders and girls, to stand with her as a metaphorical family in defiance against their terrorism. Malala frames her redemption narrative with the help of several modes of stylistic criticism, including characterization, stylistic metaphor, declarative tone, and repetition.
Context
Although she was only 16 years old at the time of this address, Malala had been an activist, blogging and speaking on television, for several years. Her passionate advocacy for an end to Taliban violence had been fueled by many personal experiences with the terrorist group’s brutality around her homeland since 2007, which is when the group took control of the area where Malala lived in Pakistan (Cooper). Author Kristen Lewis, who has written heavily on Malala, describes some of the terrorist acts that took place to cause her to speak out, “They blew up buildings and murdered people. The Taliban made people follow oppressive rules. Women were not allowed to go to school or work, or to wear makeup. They couldn’t even go outside without a male relative. Music, television, and movies were banned. People who broke the rules were punished by whipping or execution.” When the Taliban ordered all girl’s schools to close in 2009, including the school her father owned, Malala became a public advocate for causes like girl’s education and anti-violence. She continued to publicly admonish the Taliban in Pakistan for several years leading up to the attempted assassination (Lewis).
As far as her credibility goes (aside from the fact that she spoke on a day that had been proclaimed “Malala Day”), Malala experienced an influx of positivity and support from all over the world prior to this speech, especially after the attack. Hina Rabbani Khar, Pakistan’s foreign minister, called the attempted assassination “a wake-up call (to) a clear and present danger.” Malala not only gained support from leaders in her own country, such as Interior Minister Rehman Malik, who had been quoted referring to Malala as “the pride of Pakistan” and who had renamed her old school “Malala Public High School,” but Malala had also received support in the form of funds and awareness-raising from American celebrities such as Madonna and Angelina Jolie (Brumfield et al.)
Stylistic Criticism
Characterization
The first mode of stylistic criticism that Malala uses to frame her redemption narrative in her UN address is characterization. She begins by characterizing herself as a resilient heroine that has bounced back from tragedy at the hands of vicious evil. She starts to build this character by telling the audience of the Taliban’s violence against her with a brief statement “…the Taliban shot me on the left side of my forehead.” Malala then follows this with a response to the experience, “The terrorists thought they would change my aims and stop my ambitions. But nothing changed in my life except this: weakness, fear, and hopelessness died. Strength, power, and courage was born.” Malala is clear in her proclamation: the Taliban did not wound her, but they actually helped her by killing any weakness, fear, and hopelessness that she once had. This characterization of herself as someone that is back and stronger than ever, helps Malala to instill fear in the implicit Taliban audience, while simultaneously empowering agents of change, namely UN leaders and young girls to stand with her in her cause. In direct contrast to characterizations of herself as the resilient hero of this tragedy, the Taliban is referred to with distancing, belittling terms like “they,” “these terrorists,” and “extremists,” and are described as fearful, ignorant, blasphemers that are the personification of darkness. Malala does this in order to depict the Taliban as the villain in this narrative.
Stylistic Metaphor
The second mode of stylistic criticism that Malala uses to frame her redemption narrative is stylistic metaphor. She does this by depicting everyone on earth, except for the Taliban, to be a metaphorical family. She achieves this by repeatedly addressing the audience as “brothers and sisters,” and by repeatedly using words such as “we” and “us,” to unite her targeted audience with her and her goals. For example, when she addresses the UN leaders with direct requests for change, instead of using the word “I,” Malala says “We call upon all governments to…,” “We call upon developed nations to…,” etc. She further coaxes her audience from viewing her as an individual agent against the Taliban when she states “Dear brothers and sisters, do remember one thing: Malala Day is not my day. Today is the day of every woman, every boy and every girl who have raised their voice for their rights.” This family metaphor works in direct contrast the villainous characterization of the Taliban described above. The message to the Taliban is clear: Malala is not alone in her goals to persevere over their terror. If their violence is to continue, they will have to face the world; a family standing in opposition to their evil.
Declarative Tone
Malala also uses a declarative tone to state boldly of her family’s goal: “No one can stop us,” in reference to the struggle to prevail over the Taliban. This statement functions to announce that a happily-ever- after to this redemption narrative will be a reality if the world stands with her in her goals. It also works to instill confidence in the cause from those that stand with her, and to instill fear in the Taliban audience. This statement is strategically ambiguous. Listeners are not encouraged to ask how the Taliban would be defeated, but to simply trust that the family would not be stopped in their efforts for justice.
Conclusion
As I’ve discussed, Malala tells a story of redemption with this address by using several modes of stylistic criticism, including characterization, stylistic metaphor, declarative tone, and repetition. Her story is complete with a resilient, benevolent hero that has been wronged by an evil villain and has prevailed bravely. She presents the current, broader struggle against the Taliban to be parallel to her triumph over the Taliban’s attempted murder, but this time she has her “family” of supporters that she urges can ensure that good prevails over evil once and for all if they work with her. Describing the issue in such a black and white way, with not only a clear “good guy” and a clear “bad guy,” but with the force for good being the entire world as a metaphorical family, works impressively to send a warning to the Taliban that they are not standing against one girl, but rather billions of people.
