In the United States today, gay rights and equality are more or less protected; however, there was a time not too long ago, that being gay was shameful. The World War II era spawned a culture of normativity and adopted this ideal of a perfect family and life, which was widely accepted by all. However, the United States is a melting pot of not only races and cultures but also sexual diversity, and this started to shine through in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Northern California, and in particular, San Francisco became a center for this cultural liberation, and Harvey Milk’s speech inspired hope to those faced with adversity. This empathetic appeal combined with references to the audience’s ethos and logos further strengthened his message and surely left those listening not only feeling energized but empowered as well. Harvey Milk’s “The Hope Speech” actively uses Carl Rogers’ process of audience analysis that emphasizes an empathetic approach while simultaneously combining Aristotle’s use of logos, ethos, and pathos. Through this civil discourse, Milk’s recognition and use of Roger’s psychotherapeutic strategy and Aristotle’s logical process eased tensions in a period filled with strife.
While Harvey Milk has become an obscurity in today’s day and age, he is the man who openly fought for gay rights and equality and forever shifted our viewpoint for ages to come. He is in fact, “… historically significant, worthy of archiving and anthologizing, deserving of memory, and most importantly, accessible and relevant for culture and political purposes in which he can prove invigorating and troubling still, and perhaps lifesaving” (Milk, Archive of Hope 8). At a time when gay culture was shunned, Milk learned, “…how important it would be to keep his difference a secret” (Shilts 7). Harvey Milk himself was gay, and along with many others, had to struggle and strain to keep this to himself as the stakes were insurmountable. Giving this speech as the first openly gay elected official in the United States allowed him to advocate for those who were being suppressed, and in many areas, he uses his own experiences to give hope and encourage equality for all. Milk gave this speech on the steps of San Francisco City Hall during a pride parade on June 25th, 1978. This mass rally was for California’s Gay Freedom Day, and his speech further served to spur on this movement towards cultural diversity. Less than one year later, on November 27th, 1978 he was shot to death by Dan White. His speech does not aim to criticize those who are anti-gay or supporters of those sorts of movements but instead aims to inspire hope and recognize the reality around them. He begins and ends with an appeal to emotion by effectively using pathos to gain trust, yet also uses logos and ethos by stating both facts and his personal experience in politics as an openly gay man. Milk’s background gave him both the credibility and empathy to connect with his audience, making his speech all the more impactful.
The immediate audience would be those in support of gay rights and equality, and Harvey Milk’s speech uses Rogers's process of audience analysis to inspire hope. Again, one must remember that Milk is a politician and was presenting in a public setting, so it is likely that heterosexual men and women were going to hear his speech as well. He does not have to adapt his speech to his audience as his speech is for them to hear. The state of empathy as defined by Carl Rogers states, “The state of empathy, or being empathic, is to perceive the internal frame of reference of another with accuracy and with the emotional components and meanings which pertain thereto as if one were the person, but without ever losing the ‘as if’ condition” (Rogers 105). Milk employs this empathic approach in multiple areas of his speech, but at specifically the beginning and the end, where an emotional appeal is most needed. He begins with a light-hearted joke saying, “My name is Harvey Milk and I’m here to recruit you” (Milk, The Hope Speech). By opening this way, he allows himself to become relatable with his audience and become a source of comfort while he discusses a critical yet stressful issue. Pathos provides this frame of reference for the audience to connect with before he quickly moves into more fact-based information for the body of his speech.
Towards the end of the speech, however, he returns to this empathic appeal, saying “I stand here tonight in front of my gay sisters, brothers, and friends because I'm proud of you” (Milk, The Hope Speech). He describes those standing in front of him who have lost hope, those who have had horrible actions committed against them. He urges them to keep fighting and not lose hope because it is through their strength that they continue to inspire others. He continues by saying, “Without hope, not only gays, but the blacks, the seniors, the handicapped, the us'es, the us'es will give up… It means hope to a nation that has given up, because if a gay person makes it, the doors are open to everyone” (Milk, The Hope Speech). This empathic appeal ignites a new sense of purpose in this immediate audience, allowing them to see that this hope is something that is crucial not only as an individual but as a whole community. Empathy produces results by permitting experience, and this can happen one-on-one, in a speech, or even a classroom. Carl Rogers discusses empathy in multiple situations stating, “If we think, however, that empathy is effective only in the one-to-one relationship we call psychotherapy, we are greatly mistaken” (Rogers 112). Empathy serves as a connection to bring people together, no matter the situation or issue. It permits learning and experience to not only foster a deeper connection with one another, and this is the most precious gift of all.
The imagined audience would again be those in support of gay rights and equality, yet it also serves as a wake-up call to heterosexual men and women through Aristotle’s strategy of ethos. Ideally, Milk would want his speech to be heard by all, homosexual or heterosexual alike. However, while this is a tall order given the times his speech can appeal to this audience through his ethical appeal. Ethos, as defined by George Kennedy states, “…the word refers to the trustworthy character of a speaker as artistically created in a speech” (Kennedy 90). While the first portion of his speech focused on an emotional appeal to grab one’s attention, the body of his speech builds great ethical appeal by speaking largely in plain fact. An example of this is when he states, “I know there are many people in this room who are running for central committee who are gay. I encourage you” (Milk, The Hope Speech). Here, he uses his own experience as a gay politician to solidify that he is living proof of the hope that he vehemently stands by. This serves as a point of reference for the audience to build trust with the speaker because one can assume that the audience has personal struggles of their own. He also inserts relevant and current political events such as, “…the state of Mississippi decriminalize[s] marijuana” or “…an issue on the ballot called Jarvis-Gann” (Milk, The Hope Speech). By stating these events, he builds up credibility with his audience by portraying himself not as a gay rights activist, but rather as a simple run of the mill politician. With an audience that is made up of both heterosexual and homosexual men and women, this credibility allows his speech to become more convincing and leave a more significant impact.
Continuing with the idea of the imagined audience, Harvey Milk also employs the Aristotelian strategy of logos in his speech. Logos can be defined as when, “… we show the truth or the apparent truth from whatever is persuasive in each case” (Kennedy 85). The most logical and persuasive claim that Milk makes in his speech is when he relates the gay rights movement to the civil rights movement. He states, “I know we are pressed for time so I'm going to cover just one more little point. That is to understand why it is important that gay people run for office and that gay people get elected” (Milk, The Hope Speech). By relating these two movements, he draws the connection between them by saying these problems can only be remedied through people getting elected into office. However, he is not stating that they should get a pass due to their sexual orientation, but they should work hard and strive to reach being equal among their peers. He states, “A gay person in office can set a tone, can command respect not only from the larger community, but from the young people in our own community who need both examples and hope” (Milk, The Hope Speech). Through this logical appeal, he leads the audience to believe that gay rights are attainable so long as the proper method is followed. This creates the inflection of hope one sees towards the end of his speech because if his views are logically attainable, the audience is more likely to have more hope in them.
In conclusion, Harvey Milk’s “The Hope Speech” entails fostering a new generation of hope in a time where people’s spirits are low. Through his balanced use of Carl Rogers’s audience analysis and Aristotelian strategies of logos, ethos, and pathos, he openly expresses his point without tipping the already teetering scales of civilian strife. The methods he employs are by no means advanced or unattainable, yet instead, seek to inspire. By acknowledging the struggles to be faced, he does not make the task seem impossible but instead feasible to his audience. His way of engaging and interacting with his audience is admirable, and we should strive to compose more speeches in this manner.