Al Gore utilizes emotionally appealing arguments, evoking this powerful tool of persuasion in the audience through sensationali

04/09/07

English 145

The Globe Theater of Argumentation

Today’s political climate is growing ever more complex as issues like nuclear proliferation, world poverty, and sustainability rise to the forefront of international debate. In his film, An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore triumphantly shifts attention to global warming persuasively arguing that domestic, industrial, and agrarian CO2 emissions are directly affecting our environment at an alarming rate. This essay will focus on three structures of emotional argument present throughout the film: sensationalism, personal anecdotes, and our humanity.

Sensationalism is the most obvious and consistent appeal to emotion throughout the film. One apparent example of sensationalism is cinematic nature tributes. The opening and closing scenes of An Inconvenient Truth immerse the viewer in a cascading barrage of natural sensations reminiscent of photography by Ansel Adams and writings by Henry David Thoreau. Gore’s tranquil voice lulls the audience into a sense of security, facilitating an appreciation for the spectacle at hand. This glorification of nature appeals to emotion forcing the audience to acknowledge nature’s majesty. However nature tributes are only one example of sensationalism. The reoccurring use of the John [CS1] Burn’s effect provides another example. The suspense generated by the drawn out revealing of photographs captivates the audiences’ attention. The John Burns effect consequentially gives the topic at hand an aura of great importance and gravity. This form of sensationalism is used to enhance Gore’s credibility as a knowledgeable politician, depicting him on Air Force One. Furthermore, the effect develops pictures of Gore and his family to their fullest potential, aiding relevant personal narratives as well. Nature tributes and the John Burn’s Effect are two examples sensationalism, but there is no lack of additional sensationalistic strategies in the film, such as: music, grand camera angles, over the top displays, and grainy film. Although sensationalism is crucial to the film’s emotional appeal, structures of emotional argument like the personal anecdote are used as well. [CS2]

Personal anecdotes are an attempt to connect the issue of global warming to the lives of the individuals in the audience. An example lies in Gore’s story of his son’s near death after being struck by a car. The narrative has collective relevance, appealing to a commonly shared value for the nuclear family. Gore connects this commonality to global warming saying, “What we take for granted might not be here in the future.” Just as Gore unexpectedly almost lost his son, humankind could potentially (unexpectedly) loose[CS3] the place it calls home. The issue of global warming suddenly gains personal relevance for the audience. Gore goes on to use the personal anecdote in conveying the moral imperative to take action.[CS4] Once again, Gore attempts to appeal to common value for the nuclear family describing his relationship with his older sister, “Nancy was almost ten years older than me, and there were only the two of us. She was my protector and my friend at the same time.” Nancy’s death resulting from smoking impelled the Gore family to discontinue its tobacco farming due to the suggested connections between cigarettes and lung cancer. Gore explains this story serves as an example of what can happen when warnings are ignored saying, “It’s just human nature to take time to connect the dots. I know that. But I also know that there can be a day of reckoning when you wish you had connected the dots more quickly.” The Gore family’s loss becomes relevant in the realm of global warming, people not only empathize with the story, but begin to heed the warnings about global climate change. Personal anecdotes further contribute to the persuasive emotional value of the film, and allude to our common humanity.[CS5]

Our humanity makes the issue of global warming relevant to everyone. Gore consistently uses “we” and “you” in his arguments suggesting that global climate change is not just his fight; it is everyone’s fight. In addition, blame for global warming is attributed to human kind as a whole, but this is not the most persuasive link we all share. It is not our role in creating the problem at hand that unites us, but rather what we stand to loose. The film bridges social, national, economic, and cultural divides reminding the audience that not only are we are all human, but we also all share the same home. Iconic images of earth from outer space implicitly flirt [CS6] with this idea. However, Gore waits until the end of the film to expand on this point saying, “You see that pale blue dot, that’s us. Everything that has ever happened in all of human history has happened on that pixel, all the triumphs and all the tragedies, all the wars and all the famines, all the major advances. It’s our only home and that’s what’s at stake, our ability to live on planet Earth, to have a future as a civilization.” [CS7] The notion that mankind’s ability to live is being threatened throws all divisive factors aside motivating the audience to seriously consider the issue at hand. Our mortality is motivation enough to solve the problem of global warming, but our human bond is imperative. Ultimately, cooperation is the only road to the resolution of this problem. The acknowledgement of our humanity is particularly effective in motivating action because it gives the issue of global warming tremendous meaning and relevance.[CS8]

The structures of emotional argument in An Inconvenient Truth are effective in drawing attention to the issue of global warming. Sensationalism, personal anecdotes, and our humanity force the audience to recognize and evaluate global warming at personal and macroscopic levels. Although these emotional structures of argument often stray from logic and reason, they can be essential in motivating change. Emotions drive peoples’ desires, hopes, fears, intellects, but most importantly, actions. [CS9] Some critics suggest that emotions plague argumentation, subverting rational thought, but to make this claim is to overlook a necessity of the human condition. Arguments are often decided upon the stage of emotion; logic and reason are merely players in the production. Accordingly, the effect of An Inconvenient Truth on me, and I suspect others, was a strong emotional call to action, eliciting a desire to help solve the problem of global warming.[CS10]