Note: This SPESsay uses tags to mark the elements of SPES.

Your SPESsay should simply have the elements, not highlights or tags on it.

Prompt Compare the dialogue between Gilgamesh and Enkidu before they attack Humbaba, with the dialogue between David and Goliath before David attacks the giant. What can the reader infer about the two heroes based on these separate dialogues? Be sure to use SPES in your response and use in-text citations in your explanation.

Response Example STATEMENT The dialogues in The Epic of Gilgamesh and the story of David and Goliath from the Hebrew Tanakh reveal much about the two separate heroes, Gilgamesh and David. From the speeches given, Gilgamesh is revealed to be a self-seeking glory-monger, whereas David is revealed to be a self-negating God pleaser. PROOF: Gilgameshs specific use of pathos in his speech to Enkidu suggests his fame-craving, while David, on the other hand, uses pathos to appeal to his fellow Hebrew brethren to fight in the name of Yahweh. EXPLANATION: Just before the battle with Humbaba, Gilgamesh is faced with an undesirable rhetorical situation: he is confronted by his best friend who does not want to go through with this assault on the dangerous Humbaba, a threat to both mens very existence. Gilgamesh uses his power of rhetoric to convince Enkidu to lay down his fears and fight like a man on fire(19). In this pitch, he appeals to Enkidus emotional desires to be remembered and his human nature to gain glory for this deed. Uttered just before the heat of the battle, his speech suggests that Gilgamesh knows what his audience needs: a swift kick in the emotional rear to get it in gear. Of course, theres something in it for Gilgamesh, too, but he cleverly avoids appearing selfish. Instead, he opts to promote his ethos by showing his own bravado, an effective tool when trying to convince someone to get on board. SYNTHESIS: Gilgameshs ability to speak well in the heat of the moment suggests a confident, intelligent rhetor, one who understands how to use language to achieve his purpose, but also one who is able to follow through with his goals and plans. TRANSITION But Gilgamesh is certainly not the only persuasive speaker who uses his words to convince others to take a dangerous course of actions. David, too, understands the demands of his audiencein this case, the giant Goliath, who is his direct audience. EXPLANATION: Interestingly enough, like most persuasive speakers, David has a lateral audience as well. While he does speak directly to Goliath, he is really speaking to the Hebrew soldiers. This is evident from the fact that David chides the Israelites who have been cowering in fear (much as Enkidu has done in The Epic of Gilgamesh). David suggests his awareness of the Israelites need to be roused from their paralyzing fear and thrust into action. This is why he says to Goliath, And all this assembly shall know that the LORD saveth not with sword and spear: for the battle is the LORDS, and he will give you into our hands(I Samuel 17:47). Here, he is not so much taunting Goliath as he is speaking to the troops behind him, reminding them that they have nothing to fear. After all, if he, a young boy of ruddy and of fair countenance could stand against a giant, they too could stand and fight this enemy (17:45). Thus, David, too, demonstrates the

ICE

ICE

ability to appeal to both pathos and ethos, although for a much different purpose, and with a much different outcome. SYNTHESIS: Davids speech ultimately suggests that David is a youth who has utter confidence in the power of his God to deliver the giant into his hands. His fearlessness is unwarranted when one considers Davids staturea small, sun-tanned slip of a youth who is much more acquainted with an instrument of music than with an instrument of war. Yet Davids speech reveals a confidence that in from Davids perspective is warranted by the God he worships. He is so confident, that he forecasts the end of the fight before it even begins. Because God is on his side, he is bold and well spoken, not because he is anything other than a puny, skinny little kid who trusts explicitly in the power of Yahweh. Gilgamesh, on the other hand, uses his power of persuasion to promote his own name. He convinces his friend Enkidu to help him out so that his name will live on into immortality. For both David and Gilgamesh, their rhetorical aims were achieved: partially thanks to their powerful words, David slew the fierce Goliath, and Gilgamesh slew the mighty Humbaba. Thus, both men demonstrate the power of rhetorical purpose, the ability to respond to the rhetorical situation, and the pursuit of very different outcomes: Gilgamesh, honor and glory and fame; David, honor and glory to Yahweh. Thanks to their words, both mens names have stood the test of time for thousands of years, a testament to the power of the spoken word at just the right time.