I thought I should post this (yes, another one of my timed practice essays for English :P) because 1) I really like the descriptive nature of the language 2) I liked analyzing the rhetorical devices being used in the passage and 3) Phillips' speech is about a Haitian general who toppled many of his enemies and that the color of a person's skin doesn't determine their capabilities.
The analysis free-response question can be found in this PDF file: http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/ap/students/english/ap07_eng_...
Wendell Phillips
During a time rife with racism and heated contentions over issues of slavery, a prominent white Abolitionist named Wendell Phillips delivers an outspoken speech about Haitian general Toussant-Louverture to address allowing African Americans to join the military and help with the war efforts. His rhetoric serves not only to emphasize his points but also to address his audience effectively through his usage of personal pronouns. In addition, the historical allusions, anaphoras, and establishment of perspective further add to Phillips’ praise and ability to appeal to the audience.
Conspicuously, the first aspect of Phillips’ essay to analyze is how he utilizes personal pronouns such as ‘I’, ‘we’, and ‘you’ to directly speak to the audience. The ‘I’ (“I should take. . . I am about to tell you. . . I am to glean it. . . I would call him”) allows Phillips to become more approachable as well as to further fuel his passion, ultimately developing his voice on the subject matter. However, to make the speech less about himself, he uses ‘we’ and ‘you’ in statements such as “We measure genius. . .” and “You think me a fanatic. . . “ to involve his audience into his rhetorical speech. Furthermore, the purpose of the first paragraph sets perspective on Toussaint, establishing him as a hated man because he was “a negro. . . a slave” who had defeated all of his enemies “in many a battle.” By stating that his biography was based on the quotes of his enemies, this shows that Toussaint was an exemplary general. In addition, Phillips points out to the audience that they see history “not with [their] eyes, but with [their] prejudices” when judging Toussaint, inducing them to step out of their regular mindsets.
To gather the tools for informing and inculcating, Phillips uses historical allusions and anaphorical listing to effectively persuade his audience to see Toussaint’s greatness. In the second paragraph, Phillips brings in Cromwell, a significant English political leader, to compare his military skills to Toussaint in addition to Washington. In the last paragraph, Phillips lists Phocion, Brutus, Hampden, Fayette, and Washington, all great men in the eyes of the “Muse of History.” However, the muse would ink the name of Toussaint above all of the listed names; as a result, this delineates Toussaint’s quintessential nature as “a soldier, a statesman, [and] a martyr.” With the anaphoras “I would call him Cromwell. . . I would call him Washington,” Phillips innately compares Toussaint to these two figures, then he states the flaws of each that Toussaint doesn’t have. Due to anaphora and allusions, Phillips adds to the needed rhetoric in order to effectively persuade his audience to see his beliefs.
In conclusion, Toussaint isn’t just a historical figure at the end of Phillips’ speech; he becomes a figure of magnificence, a figure to be admire. By apotheosizing him, Phillips is able to achieve his purpose of convincing his audience that African Americans should be allowed to serve the military.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
