Nolan 1

Katie Nolan

Writing 2010

Erin Rogers

25 January 2017

Rhetorical Analysis Essay

Between April 24th and May 20th, 2017, four Confederate monuments in New Orleans

were taken down and replaced with public artwork and an American flag. Most notably, the city

removed a statue atop a sixty-foot pedestal of Confederate General Robert E. Lee, mounted in

1884, as protesters both for and against the removal chanted and picketed nearby. New Orleans

Mayor, Mitch Landrieu, who was the first to suggest the removal in late 2015, explained the

decision to the divided city in a speech entitled “Truth: Remarks on the Removal of Confederate

Monuments in New Orleans” on May 19, 2017 at Gallier Hall, just blocks away from the statue

being removed. In his passionate speech, Mayor Landrieu utilizes the rhetorical devices ethos,

logos, and pathos to argue for and explain the city’s controversial decision to remove the four

monuments.

Landrieu uses ethos to establish trust in his audience about his administration’s decision

to remove confederate statues. He states: “I knew that taking down the monuments was going to

be tough, but you elected me to do the right thing, not the easy thing and this is what that looks

like.” As an elected official, Landrieu has established ethos throughout his entire political career,

connecting with and acting in the best interests of the people of New Orleans. Landrieu uses this

relationship that he has already created in order to evoke trust with listeners, primarily residents

of New Orleans, that removal is the right choice. Approaching the end of his speech, Landrieu

also references the many other people involved in coming to the removal decision. He states
 Nolan 2

After decades of public debate...After public hearings and approvals from three separate

community led commissions. After two robust public hearings and a 6-1 vote by the duly

elected New Orleans City Council. After Review by 13 different federal and state judges.

The full weight of the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government has been

brought to bear and the monuments in accordance with the law have been removed.

Many well known, professional, and publicly elected people put lots of time and thought into the

decision to remove the confederate statues. People who have sworn upon the Bible to act in the

best interests of the people they were elected by carefully reviewed the decision, examined

evidence, and consulted the people the decision would affect. Landrieu is using the authority of

other officials who have plenty of ethos in their own right, as well as that of the careful and

deliberate process of coming to the sensitive decision, to establish ethos and assure his listeners

that he made the best one for New Orleans.

Landrieu utilizes logos to strike at the heart of the issue of Confederate statue removal.

Early on in his speech, he begins:

let’s start with the facts. The historic record is clear, the...statues were not erected just to

honor these men, but as part of the movement which became known as the Cult of the

Lost Cause. The ‘cult’ had one goal - through monuments and through other means - to

rewrite history and hide the truth...the monuments that we took down were meant to

rebrand the history of our city and the ideals of a defeated Confederacy.

The most prevalent argument in support for the preservation of Confederate monuments is that

taking them down censors an important part of Southern history. To counter this, Landrieu

recounts, according to a clear historical record, the lesser known history of the monuments: that

they were put in place by the Cult of the Lost Cause to glorify the Confederacy and flip the
 Nolan 3

narrative from an army whose cornerstone rested upon the “moral truth” that “the negro is not

equal to the white man” as the Vice President of the Confederacy, Alexander Stephens, said in

1861, to that of an army of valiant men fighting for freedom. The real history of these

monuments, Landrieu states, was to repaint the Confederacy as heroic, and in the process

perpetuate the vile racism at its cornerstone. He uses logos to counter the popular argument

against removal, by stating that the statues were erected to glorify, sanitize, and hold onto the

past, a past which was built upon oppression and racism that divides New Orleans far deeper and

far longer than the statue’s removal ever could. Indeed, the only way to move on from this

division, according to Landrieu, is to abolish the false narrative of the Cult of the Lost Cause and

the monuments that go with it.

Towards the end of the speech, Landrieu uses logos again when he states that “The

confederacy was on the wrong side of history and humanity. It sought to tear apart our nation and

subjugate our fellow Americans to slavery. This is the history we should never forget and one

that we should never again put on a pedestal or revered.” As before, Landrieu uses an appeal to

logic by reminding his audience of the true history of the Confederacy. Coming at the end of his

speech, this is the most important argument Landrieu makes about the monument removal, and

also one of the simplest. The legacy of the Confederacy has been warped and obscured in the last

150 years, and Mayor Landrieu asks his audience to strip the influences of the Cult of the Lost

Cause away and examine the Confederacy for what it truly fought for, and then decide whether it

is appropriate or in New Orleans’ best interest to elevate and celebrate that cause.

Mayor Landrieu reaches out to the people of New Orleans by reminding them of their

city’s rich and diverse history. He uses pathos to convince his audience of the importance of

unity, stating that

 Nolan 4

Indivisibility is our essence. Isn’t this the gift that the people of New Orleans have given

the world? We radiate beauty and grace in our food, in our music...in everything we

do...think about Mardi Gras, think about muffaletta, think about the saints, gumbo, red

beans and rice. By God, just think.

Landrieu is extending a hand to every New Orleanian, whether or not they support the removal

of confederate statues, by referencing things that they all share- the food they all grew up eating,

the teams they all root for, the music they all hear radiating from the French Quarter. He is using

pathos to reach out to his diverse audience, many of whom disagree with him on the issue of

statue removal. He is evoking, through specific references to New Orleans culture, pride for his

city, and instilling a sense of unity in his audience. This not only draws in listeners who support

Landrieu and the removal of confederate statues, but extends a hand to those who disagree with

him as well. After reminding all New Orleanians of all that they share, he is better able to

approach a contentious issue that many of them do not see eye to eye on. He is also arguing to

them that the decision to remove the statues was not to cause a divide in New Orleans. Although

his speech occured before the tragic events in Charlottesville, Virginia, in which protests by

white supremacists about the removal of confederate statues resulted in the death of a

counterprotestor, Landrieu knew all too well that the removal would bring to the forefront

racially charged tension and conflict. His use of pathos and his emphasis on unity is a direct

counter to this idea; he is showing that the decision to remove the statues was not to divide his

community and usher in conflict, but to resolve it.

Landrieu uses pathos again in his speech to further oppose the idea that the removal of

confederate statues creates racial tension that would not exist otherwise. The mayor implores his

audience to put themselves in the shoes of an African American parent to illustrate how
 Nolan 5

confederate statues continue to serve as a reminder and upholder of the racist society in which

they were created, and why removal puts New Orleans a path to eradicating some of that racism.

He asks his audience to “consider the monuments from the perspective of an African American

mother or father [who is] trying to explain to their fifth grade daughter who Robert E. Lee is and

why he stands atop our beautiful city. Can you do it? Can you look into that young girls eyes and

convince her that Robert E. Lee is there to encourage her?” Mayor Landrieu asks people to put

themselves in the shoes of a parent and feel as they would feel, in order to illustrate how painful

and damaging confederate statues are to African American citizens, especially children. The

discussion about Confederate monuments in New Orleans is not only about politics and history.

The statues still affect people everyday; they make young children feel discouraged, they make

parents anxious and disheartened. They make people feel deeply, and often negatively, and this

facet of the monuments has not slipped Landrieu. He is asking those who disagree with him to

feel how those parents and children feel, so that they can understand a vital reason for monument

removal: to respect the citizens of New Orleans who for so long have been hurt, discouraged, and

disadvantaged by the statues and the racism they have perpetuated and glorified.

The removal of Confederate statues is a controversial issue that requires Americans to

examine some of the deepest wounds in their country’s history. Although standing tall since the

1800s, confederate monuments have never been more visible to the public, and the conflicting

messages they send to different Americans have never been so widely scrutinized. It is in this

sensitive and controversial climate that politicians argue and appeal to the citizens they represent.

In his speech “Truth: Remarks on the Removal of Confederate Monuments in New Orleans”

Mayor Mitch Landrieu utilizes the rhetorical devices ethos, logos, and pathos to argue for the
 Nolan 6

removal of Confederate statues and bring his city together on a political issue that has loomed

over America for nearly 140 years.