Nicole Ritschel

Speech 1 Outline

CAS100c

February 11, 2008

Mary Fisher’s “A Whisper of AIDS”

I. Introduction

The reality of AIDS is brutally clear to those who are infected, but to those who are not it always seems like a distant whisper.

a. Attention Getter

According to the New York Times each year 63,000 Americans are newly infected with the disease, a large percentage of them being people ages 18 through 25.

b. Topic

Sixteen years ago, a HIV positive married mother named Mary Fisher stepped out and gave a speech on the effects of AIDS on her and her family at the 1992 Republican National Convention. She contracted the disease from her husband, but thankfully their children are HIV negative.

c. Credibility

After review of the speech and research on AIDS and how it affects those who have it, it is possible to break apart and analyze the structural and emotional aspects and the reasons why the speech was necessary.

d. Preview

The exigence, audience, and constraints of Fisher’s speech are important to outline in order to get a better understanding of the situation.

Transition: Thus, we must dive deeper into the issue.

II. Exigence

The exigence of the speech was extremely evident throughout the piece, and I feel as though this speech was a very ground-breaking experience for the Republican Party.

a. The reason that Fisher came out and gave this speech was to show that the face of AIDS isn’t the homosexual, liberal, artists living in New York City.

1. Mary Fisher is a well-off, white, conservative, married woman with two children… with AIDS.

2. This opened up a lot of windows for people who are in her situation.

b. According to Wordpress, married women are much more likely to have AIDS than the American nation thinks.

Transition: The relative ignorance about the topic is the main reason that this speech was a necessity, and her flawless execution is what made it so famous.

III. Audience

The audience that Fisher spoke to was a concentrated set of powerful and intelligent conservatives at the Republican National Convention.

a. Although it was nationally televised, she was directly speaking to the people present at the RNC. (Republican National Convention.)

1. Speaking at such a high-profile political event can prove to be a double-edged sword.

2. She spoke to some of the most powerful people in the nation and was able to voice her opinions, but the Convention is often targeted by critics to have discriminatory and narrow minded views about diversity and problems such as AIDS.

b. Convention speeches are always very high-profiled and often very highly criticized by the media and the opposition.

c. According to an article of the New York Times she stated that “she wanted the audience to have a face to put the disease to.”

Transition: Her audience was probably the greatest obstacle that Fisher needed to overcome when writing and delivering this speech.

IV. Constraints

The constraints that Fisher faced when giving this speech were monumental.

a. First off, her topic is very controversial, especially for16 years ago when she gave the speech.

b. She had to be careful in her diction and her presentation because AIDS and HIV is a subject that people can be very passionate about and she had to make sure not to offend anyone.

c. She also needed to use her words to show the audience that she was not there for their pity, and this is very clear when watching the speech.

1. She wanted their acceptance, their support, and for them to be educated.

d. Finally, she had to work with an audience who, as a whole, has not had much experience with HIV or anything that Fisher was going through.

2. The audience was relatively new to the subject.

Transition: The hurdles that Fisher had to jump over were monumental.

V. Conclusion.

Mary Fisher gave us a speech that will forever change how we see HIV and AIDS as a disease and how the politically active person will view a National Convention speaker.

She broke stereotypes eloquently without making herself seem weak.

a. Restate thesis and Summary:

The reason that she gave her speech, to whom, and what bridges she had to cross to get there show us, the reviewers, how much inner strength it must have taken her to stand in front of the nation and pour her heart out, without forcing us to pity her.

b. Decisive Closing

Thank you for your time, and I hope you are excited for the next speech!

Works Cited:

Harris, Gardiner. "Figures on HIV Rates Expected to Rise." New York Times 2 Dec. 2007. 10 Feb. 2008 <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/health/02aids.html?

r=1&scp=1&sq=AIDS+63%2C000&st=nyt&oref=slogin>.

Kuczynski, Alex, and Matthew Purdy. "THE REPUBLICANS: PHILADELPHIA DIARY; Replacing Mary Fisher, and Pushing Abstinence ." New York Times 1 Aug. 2000. 10 Feb. 2008

<http://query.nytimes.com/gst/ fullpage.html?res=940CE6DF113DF932A3575BC0A9669C8B63&scp=1&sq=Mary+fisher+1992&st=nyt>.

"To Avoid HIV Infection, Don't Get Married." Wordpress. 18 Nov. 2007. 10 Feb. 2008

http://http://hivskeptic.wordpress.com/2007/11/18/to-avoid-hiv-infection-dont-get-married/.

Comments

Caitlin Leahy: You had a great opening and you talked well to the audience. Sometimes you were a little fast so I would watch your speed next time. You had great transitions that were subtle but I knew exactly where you were going with the speech. You knew what you were talking about and your speech was well researched. You varied your rate and that really helped emphasize the important points. Great job!

Whitney Trompeter: You were very confident, had great eye contact, and were enthusiastic. You were very informative and had a great conclusion. Sometimes you did trail off/get quieter at teh end of your sentences, but other than that it was a good speech!

Michael McKenna: It appears that a lot of research went into the speech. You began your conclusion with "In conclusion..." which is kind of boring and not vey exciting, so next time try to work on a more creative way to begin your conclusion. You incorporated hand gestures into the speech, which enhances the delivery of your speech and attracts the attention of the audience. Good job!

Jess Mannion: Great enthusiasm and energy in your speech!! Work on keeping a more consistent projection volume, for the most part, your volume and projection were perfect, but occasionally you seemed too quiet. Overall your speech seemed very natural and you kept it interesting throughout, providing good references and information!

David Oh: You had great eye contact and you spoke very clearly. You seemed really energized. Thats good to see. You speech was well structured and you had a great close. Good Job

Laura O'Neal: Nicole, your topic is really interesting, I can't wait to hear more about it in your second speech! You were confident, poised and seemed relaxed- all of that helped your credibility, I think. At some points you talked a little bit fast, but you were making good eye contact with everyone in the room and used good vocabulary, so it didn't effect your speech overall too much. Good job today!

John Galvin: It is obvious that you practiced this a lot. You seemed very confident up there. Your delivery had a great pace and flowed very well (with appropriate pauses etc.) and you also made great eye contact. I can't really think of anything that you did wrong.

Siama Manzoor: Nicole, you did well speaking with emotion and keeping eye contact. You had a solid introduction and overall good speech, although it did seem a little over-structured. Nice work!

Enrique Ortiz: I waited until other people had delivered their piece, and as I predicted, there is a general consensus that you did very well! Your eye contact was terrific, the delivery was flawless, and your tone switched according to the mood. I understand that you were nervous, but that did not seem to show while you were speaking. Furthermore, the outline is well constructed, includes relevant information, and is within the allotted time frame. Great JOB!