Caitlin Johnson

Mansfield University

November 2012

The Rhetoric of Speeches: Colonel Slade’s Defense of a Good-Hearted Young Man

Rhetoric, most commonly used for persuasion, is often associated with speeches. There

are many speeches in the media that excellently demonstrate the use of rhetoric. Politicians use

speeches to present a platform, and actors make it their job to convey meaning through speech.

In short, anyone advocating an idea does so through speech, through rhetoric. Interestingly, some

of the finest speeches are fictional. For example, Al Pacino’s speech in the movie Scent of a

Woman is notable for the speaker’s remarkable presence and use of language. Scent of a Woman

is a movie that conveys powerful messages through the characters’ actions, and it ends with the

movie’s most stunning act of all: a speech that shows how people can affect one another and how

a well-constructed rhetorical act (even a fictional one) can sway audiences. The speech tests

audiences’ priorities and reshapes their ideas of education, character, and leadership in relation to

justice. It shows audiences how two people, faced with difficult trials, can learn to do what is

right despite hardships and how even one voice can make a difference. And it shows that human

beings have the freedom and therefore the responsibility to perceive situations in different lights.

The Story

Charlie Simms, an intelligent and good-hearted, though naïve, young man attends an all-

boys prep school. One night, he witnesses a prank being set up for the headmaster’s shiny new

Jaguar. After the prank occurs, the headmaster hears that Charlie and his “friend” George might

be able to identify the guilty parties. He threatens them both with expulsion if they do not tell,

but then he privately takes a new approach with Charlie: if Charlie does tell, the headmaster will

1

ensure him with a free ride to an Ivy League college (a dream come true for a Charlie, who is

dependent on financial aid).

The headmaster gives George and Charlie Thanksgiving weekend to think it over before

what is in all essence a trial. With the start of Thanksgiving weekend comes Charlie’s real

adventure: he takes on the job of looking after a blind war veteran in order to raise his plane fare

for Christmas break. Unfortunately, the blind veteran, Lieutenant Colonel Slade (Pacino), has his

own plans. He shanghaies Charlie into guiding him through a final tour of pleasures in New

York City: “stay at a first class hotel, eat an agreeable meal, drink a nice glass of wine, see my

big brother… and then make love to a terrific woman. After that, I’m going to lay down on my

big beautiful bed at the Waldorf and blow my brains out” (Pacino). Throughout the movie,

Charlie is faced with two dilemmas, both of which the Colonel expresses beautifully, “Do we

tell; do we not tell? Do we follow the rich boys’ code or not? Do we let this blind asshole die or

not?” (Pacino). Throughout the movie, Charlie guides the Colonel around New York, item by

item on the bucket list, while trying to decide how to stick to his honor. What is worse, the bribe

or the secret, the Colonel’s suicide or his miserable life?

During their time together, Charlie and the Colonel never fail to shock one another. The

Colonel’s senses of sound and smell are extraordinary, thus allowing him to tell how beautiful a

woman is by her perfume and voice and to teach one particular young woman how to tango.

Charlie, recognizing this, allows the Colonel to drive a Ferrari on back roads, hoping to give the

Colonel one more fond memory to hold onto. During their adventures, the Colonel tries to advise

Charlie – telling him to give in, telling him “conscience is dead” (Pacino). Charlie makes it clear,

however, that his conscience is unbreakable. Charlie’s greatest act of honor and compassion

arrives when he walks in on the Colonel preparing to kill himself. Charlie tries to persuade the

2

Colonel first with aggression, then physical force, then surrender, and finally with personal

connection. He helps the Colonel realize that he does not really want to die. The Colonel, either

because Charlie actually persuades him or because Charlie (and his uncommon character) means

something to him, gives up his attempted suicide. To sum up their experience, the Colonel says,

“All my life, I stood up to everyone and everything because it made me feel important – you do

it because you mean it. You got integrity, Charlie” (Pacino).

The Colonel gives Charlie a ride back to school, dropping him off at the edge of campus

and driving off. Charlie, tired and scared, takes his seat on the stage of the courtroom-like

auditorium and awaits his fate. During the headmaster’s opening speech to the full student body

that sits passively, Colonel Slade makes his way to Charlie’s side. With only brief introductions

as an interruption, the court proceeding begins. George avoids surrender at first but soon gives

in, naming his friends as possible suspects. Charlie carefully avoids naming anyone but fails to

properly defend himself – after all, who would take his word over the headmaster’s? The

headmaster decides to suggest that the Disciplinary Committee reward George for honorably

turning over the villains and expel Charlie for covering for them. In a burst of indignation, the

Colonel begins his defense of the singularly good-hearted young man.

This movie as a whole is a stunning example of the trials of life, accented with instances

of the extraordinary. The Colonel’s speech is the crowning moment of the movie, and it is one of

Pacino’s most touching and inspirational roles. In the speech, the Colonel focuses on three key

ideas – education, character, and leadership – and a close analysis of these ideas demonstrates

that, although fictional, the speech is an effective example of the powers of rhetoric and of the

power even one voice can have in matters of justice.

Education

3

The Colonel, rather than beginning with a summary of Charlie’s assets, makes a point of

calling the school out on its poor treatment of an innocent student. He knows that the school is

perfectly aware of Charlie’s good nature and feels no need to waste time explaining it. Instead,

he focuses on the school’s wrongdoings. Despite the fact Charlie is an excellent student (studies

hard and does work study), the headmaster threatens him, disregarding the fact he does not even

know for sure if Charlie can identify the pranksters at all. What does this say about the integrity

of the education system? The Colonel offers an answer. When the headmaster gives his opening

speech, explaining the reason for the assembly, he claims that it is to protect the integrity of the

school, which is know across the nation as a “cradle of leadership.” The headmaster feels the

need to defend the situation using this metaphor, and it demonstrates a carefully chosen use of

rhetoric. Rhetoric, essentially, is “the art of proving opposites” (Ramage 26). The Colonel’s

rhetoric proves to be stronger than the headmaster’s when he addresses the hypocrisy of a school

that claims to nurture great people but threatens the future of one truly decent person. He

deconstructs the headmaster’s metaphor and his definition of the situation, the school’s need to

weed out liars like Charlie, and he makes it clear that this whole scene can be viewed differently.

He says, “As I came in here, I heard those words: ‘cradle of leadership’ – well, when the bough

breaks, the cradle will fall, and it has fallen here” (Pacino). The Colonel uses the metaphor to

prove the point that a school (a cradle of leadership) will fall if the administration (the bough)

that supports it is compromised. He cleverly uses the headmaster’s own metaphor against him,

inferring that the headmaster – the bough supports the cradle of the school – has compromised

himself by bribing Charlie. He claims that by destroying Charlie’s future and rewarding George

for giving in, the school is undermining its own motto – it is causing its own fall.

4

After displaying the school’s faults, the Colonel presents a solution: allow Charlie to

continue his education. He does not put it so simply, though. Instead, he creates another

metaphor:

I have come to the crossroads in my life. I always knew what the right path was, without exception I knew, but I never took it. You know why? It was too damn hard! Now here’s Charlie. He’s come to the crossroads; he has chosen a path – it’s the right path; it’s a path made of principle that leads to character. Let him continue on his journey. You hold this boy’s future in your hands, committee – it’s a valuable future, believe me! Don’t destroy it – protect it, embrace it. It’s gonna make you proud one day, I promise you. (Pacino)

In this passage, the Colonel starts by comparing Charlie to himself in a short anecdote, and he

makes Charlie seem like the better man. This is similar to the earlier instance when he praised

Charlie for his integrity, “You do it because you mean it” (Pacino). This is a bold and brilliant

move: he makes a young man look more intelligent and good than an older and more

experienced one. The Colonel then presents the metaphor of a crossroads, a crossroads for which

school is supposed to prepare students. He claims he never took the right path but that Charlie

has taken the right one despite its hardship. This highlights Charlie’s value as a student and

member of society. He finishes this point by asking the Disciplinary Committee personally to

allow Charlie to continue down that right path toward character and by promising that Charlie’s

future is one worth protecting. The Colonel cleverly takes the responsibility out of Charlie’s

hands (for giving in to the headmaster’s bribe) and into the hands of the Committee (for

protecting a young boy’s “valuable” future).

The point of this scene is to persuade the school to keep Charlie rather than destroy his

future. Appropriately, the scene takes place in the auditorium of a school. It is important to make

note of this setting: it is an auditorium with tiered seating, portraits on the walls (probably former

headmasters) staring down at students as they walk in, and a stage with a mural of biblical theme

behind it that has the caption, “The place where people meet to seek the highest is holy ground”

5

(Pacino). Viewers, whether sitting in the scene or in front of their TV, can clearly see that

education is sacred on this “holy ground.” Also notice that the Colonel defends Charlie in front

of an assembly of teachers, administrators, and fellow students – not to mention movie viewers,

many of whom are (or once were) students like Charlie. Charlie is standing alone against this

compromised educational system, and the Colonel focuses on Charlie’s underdog status to target

the sympathies and concerns of his audience and get them to connect with Charlie’s dilemma. He

recognizes that education plays or has played a significant role in his audience members’ lives

and identities. Readymade identities, as defined by Ramage, are “prefabricated by others and are

on offer through the workplace, the marketplace, and the cultural space we occupy” (42). The

Colonel uses his audiences’ readymade identities as learners and teachers to persuade them of

Charlie’s worth. He asks the learners to admire and sympathize with him and the teachers to

“embrace” and “protect” him. Charlie is likely to lose this battle of integrity, and the Colonel

focuses on his excellence compared to the school’s poor treatment to emphasize that he deserves

to win.

Character

Colonel Slade, throughout his speech, emphasizes connections between education and

character, and he makes it clear that this whole situation is a question of character. It is important

to notice that, although the scene takes place in a school, the auditorium itself looks like a

courtroom. Like a courtroom, this is the place where character is measured and one soul’s future

is determined. At the beginning of the scene, the Colonel directly addresses this setting by

sarcastically asking if they are in a courtroom, to which the headmaster replies that it is the

closest the school could manage to one. The Colonel, without missing a beat, says he would like

people to swear in. The headmaster quickly counters that there are no oaths at the school and that

6

everyone is on his honor. The Colonel does not respond to this, but there is a pause just long

enough to make movie viewers think, “Wait…” If everyone is on his honor, then why is a public

court session necessary, and why is Charlie in this situation at all? If the headmaster had treated

Charlie as though he were on his honor, then he would have taken his word for it in the

beginning of the movie when Charlie claimed he could not identify the pranksters. Further, the

headmaster is clearly not on his honor: he is the one who bribes and then threatens Charlie with

his future over a prank, calling it a school (not personal) matter. With these simple sarcastic

remarks and a subtle pause in speech, the Colonel challenges the headmaster’s ethos – his status

of trust, knowledge/experience, reliability, and neutrality in the situation (Ramage 91). He forces

audience members, especially movie viewers who know the whole story, to wonder who has

character in this scene and who does not.

As made clear by the Colonel’s final plea for reason, Charlie has chosen a path “made of

principle that leads to character” (Pacino), and he has chosen it despite the fact it would be much

easier to turn in the pranksters. The Colonel esteems Charlie for this, and he ridicules the school

for rewarding the wrong boy. He says, “Well, gentlemen, when the shit hits the fan, some guys

run and some guys stay. Here’s Charlie facin’ the fire, and there’s George hidin’ in big daddy’s

pocket. And what are you doin’? You’re gonna reward George and destroy Charlie” (Pacino).

The Colonel praises Charlie by insulting George, and he questions the character of a school that

will reward the boy who sells his friends out and hides behind his rich father rather than the boy

who follows his conscience. He furthers his point by claiming that the school’s very spirit has

died with its loss of character: “you’re building a rat ship here – a vessel for sea-going snitches”

(Pacino). Again, the Colonel takes responsibility away from Charlie and hands it to the school.

7

He charges it with the creation of “sea-going snitches” because of its action against good

character (this hearing) and its lack of principle (the headmaster’s threat and bribe).

The Colonel counters his grave accusation with praise for Charlie: “This boy’s soul is

intact – it’s nonnegotiable – you know how I know? Someone here, and I’m not gonna say who,

offered to buy it, only Charlie here wasn’t selling” (Pacino). As with comparing Charlie to

George, the Colonel raises Charlie’s image by putting down that of someone else. The internal

jab is clearly meant for the headmaster, but no one in the scene but the Colonel, Charlie, and the

headmaster knows about the bribe. The others can probably guess, though, that when the Colonel

claims someone offered to buy Charlie’s soul, he means the headmaster not because the Colonel

makes any kind of gesture but rather because the headmaster overreacts. The Colonel questions

the headmaster’s character in a way that only three men can know for sure, but the headmaster

all too quickly defends himself and says that the Colonel is out of order (referring back to the

courtroom setting). While the rest of the audience may have paid more attention to the praise of

Charlie’s “intact” and “nonnegotiable” soul, the headmaster chooses to focus on the jab at him –

simply due to the way the Colonel presented his comment. When the headmaster calls the

Colonel out, we see a major turning point in the speech. The Colonel stands up and, asserting his

power over that of the headmaster, raises his voice above its typical projection, “Out of order?

I’ll show you out of order! You don’t know what out of order is, Mr. Trask. I’d show you, but

I’m too old, I’m too tired, I’m too fuckin’ blind. If I were the man I was five years ago, I’d take a

flamethrower to this place! ‘Out of order’ – who the hell d’you think you’re talking to?”

(Pacino). The Colonel may be a blue-collar man in a white-collar world, but he has seen enough

injustice to be angered by the headmaster’s attempt to overrule him. This burst of authority

shocks the entire audience. Until now, the Colonel has been sitting down, and his presence has

8

been assertive but calm. While he was sitting, he was, in his own words, “just getting warmed

up” (Pacino). Now things are serious; now the Colonel is truly angry. He is not only defending

Charlie’s character; he is also condemning the headmaster’s. Being a stranger to this academic

world but an experienced member of the adult world, the Colonel more than anyone else can

credibly argue the school’s cruel use of authority. Through this sudden assertion of power, the

Colonel indirectly supports his ethos by deconstructing that of the school – it is so disgusting to

him, he wishes he could burn it.

The Colonel drives his point of Charlie’s valuable future and character home by sharing

another anecdote. He compares his past experiences to this current one:

I have seen boys like these, younger than these, their arms torn out, their legs ripped off, but there is nothing like the sight of an amputated spirit – there is no prosthetic for that. You think you’re merely sending this splendid foot soldier back home to Oregon with his tail between his legs, but I say you are executing his soul! (Pacino)

Here, the Colonel imposes his readymade identity as well as his constructed identity as a Colonel

on the scene to paint a picture and prove a point. Constructed identities are those we choose

“based on available models and within the limits of that which we’ve been given” (Ramage 42-

3). The Colonel is a man of war, a status the military provided for him and he chose to build on.

He vividly describes horrors he has seen – forcing audience members to imagine scenes of war.

He then claims that as bad as that was, this is worse – he describes student-age soldiers in

physical torment, and then he calls Charlie a “splendid” foot soldier. This detailed metaphor is an

effective attempt to play on audience members’ knowledge of war. Everyone has been affected

by war in some way or another, but the Colonel has seen it first hand, and he shares the

experience to depict the horror of dismemberment and death – bodily and spiritual. This creates a

connection between Charlie, the other students, and any man that might be in charge of them. He

is asking the students to imagine having lost a limb, or (worse) a soul, and he is accusing the

9

school of being responsible for such a painful loss. In this situation, the Colonel takes on the

constructed identity (Ramage 42) of protector – he recognizes that he is in charge of Charlie.

Earlier in the movie, it had been the other way around – Charlie had saved the Colonel’s life, and

now the Colonel is returning the favor. The Colonel may be exaggerating the gravity of the

situation by equating expulsion with the death of Charlie’s soul, but this exaggeration is well

placed. After all, the headmaster claims in the beginning of the scene that the prank is a

“symptom of a sickness of society, a sickness which runs counter to the principles this school

was founded on” (Pacino). The headmaster’s statement is a petty exaggeration of his personal

embarrassment while the Colonel’s metaphor is an effective exaggeration of how important

education is in a person’s development of character.

Leadership

Slade’s final key idea in his speech is leadership, which he believes depends on education

and character. Unfortunately, “leadership” is often a dummy term and, according to Ramage, is

used as a “personification and exemplification of the dominant values and beliefs of the domain

within which [a particular leader] performs” (47). Ramage also claims that the success of leaders

is often measured according to worldly success (if they are successful, they must be leaders), and

he complains that describing a leader’s life as a repeatable formula reduces “human action to a

form of motion” (47-8). The Colonel addresses the faults with this term by avoiding a specific

formula. He does not suggest that all people should do what Charlie has done, and he does not

focus on the fact that Charlie is keeping a secret. Rather, he suggests that all people should share

Charlie’s motivation for what he did – honor and courage – and he focuses on the fact that

Charlie is not giving in to a bribe. The Colonel presents broad traits, not specific actions, as

guidelines for good leadership. His careful focus on Charlie’s positive motivation and the

10

school’s negative action is an excellent display of pathos and logos: the use of specific language

to embody the message and lend to presence, and the overall coherence of the message (Ramage

83). The Colonel illuminates certain points and down plays others to boost Charlie’s image as the

victim, not the villain; and he carefully connects the previous points of education and character

to leadership.

To illustrate his point about what makes a good leader, the Colonel first refers to

education. He says in the beginning of his speech, “If you think you’re preparing these minnows

for manhood, you better think again because I say you are killing the very spirit this institution

proclaims it instills” (Pacino). The spirit of the school is supposed to be character, strength, and

excellence, as described by the headmaster in the beginning of the scene. The Colonel questions

how good leaders can be created if the school breaks its own principles. He furthers his point

later by continuing the metaphor started by the headmaster’s boastful claim that the school is a

“cradle of leadership.” He had said the cradle has fallen due to a broken bough, and now he

continues his scolding accusation by saying, “Makers of men? Creators of leaders? Be careful

what kind of leaders you’re producing here” (Pacino). He warns the school administrators

personally to beware of what traits they are instilling in their students should this trial end poorly

for Charlie: the desire to take the easy way out, accept bribes, and sell someone else’s future to

buy their own.

The Colonel presents the finest point of his argument about leadership by referring to the

courtroom scene again. He says,

I don’t know if Charlie’s silence here today is right or wrong; I’m not a judge or jury. But I can tell you this: he won’t sell anybody out to buy his future! And that, my friends, is called integrity; that’s called courage; now that’s the stuff leaders should be made of! (Pacino)

11

The Colonel makes it clear that it does not matter if Charlie’s specific action is right or wrong

and that the point is that Charlie’s heart is in the right place. Referring back to the problems with

“leadership”, the Colonel focuses on Charlie’s integrity and courage – desirable principles not

specific to a certain time or place. People do not necessarily want leaders who refuse to deliver

guilty persons; but people do want leaders who demonstrate honor and bravery. The Colonel is

qualified to speak for Charlie’s principles because he has witnessed them first-hand: his desire to

do what is right (to not abandon a miserable old blind man to death, and to not give in to an

arrogant headmaster’s bribe). He admits that he cannot decide whether Charlie’s decision to

cover for the pranksters is right or wrong, but he proves that the verdict for Charlie’s expulsion

should involve more than the mere matter of this prank. The Colonel is blind, and this can be

seen as a metaphor for an ideal justice system. Justice is supposed to be blind, and so is the

Colonel. The Colonel, despite and perhaps because of his own regrets and mistakes, is the most

qualified person in the room to deal out judgment. Even though he is blind, he has seen both

sides of the argument for what they really are, and he understands the situation: Charlie’s future

has been threatened over a prank that has nothing to do with him, and Charlie has refused to give

in. The headmaster’s attitude supports the Colonel’s earlier remark that “conscience is dead,” but

Charlie’s attitude proves him wrong. The Colonel applies to the audience’s principles by

focusing not on what Charlie may have done wrong but what he has done right.

Concluding Remarks

Overall, Colonel Slade persuasively argues that Charlie is a good-hearted young man

who deserves to continue his education. Throughout the scene, he holds his audience of school

members and movie watchers captive with his excellent use of language and presence. Each and

every person watches and listens to his strong argument – he even startles them when he stands

12

up to assert his power and, indirectly, build his ethos. The disciplinary committee is persuaded

not only to allow Charlie to stay but also to remove any note whatsoever of the event from his

record so that it never comes back to haunt him. The entire student body erupts into applause at

this news, and the court case is over at last. The movie Scent of a Woman is about the crossing of

two lives: that of Lieutenant Colonel Slade and Charlie Simms. Charlie helps the Colonel regain

his appreciation for life, and the Colonel (in a spectacular finale to the movie) defends Charlie’s

right to his education and therefore his life. At first it may seem that the Colonel is simply

persuading the school to let Charlie stay, but it become apparent that he is doing far more than

that. He is defending Charlie as a student, a good person, and an integral and courageous future

leader. We use rhetoric every day of our lives: it is the art of how we choose to communicate

information. Studying a speech like this allows us to examine a carefully constructed specimen

of rhetoric. It allows us to analyze the aspects of rhetoric that are essential to everyday use:

identities, presence and coherence (ethos, pathos, logos), word choice, themes, metaphors, etc.

More importantly, it also allows us to examine how the trials of life two relatable characters face

can affect our views of issues like justice. Charlie and the Colonel change in order to help one

another – Charlie acts on his dormant courage, and the Colonel acts against his decided

pessimism – and this tests audiences’ ideas of right and wrong. The Colonel is a miserable old

blind man, but Charlie helps him; Charlie is in an underdog situation because of his secret, but

the Colonel helps him. The Colonel’s speech illustrates that justice is not always black and

white. Sometimes general traits are more important than specific behaviors. The adventure

Charlie and the Colonel have, and the friendship they create, demonstrates what the Colonel

explicitly explains in his speech: there is merit in facing the fire, and it is often easier when

someone is there to face it with you. The overarching idea here is that human beings have the

13

freedom to analyze situations in different lights and therefore, as the Colonel argues, have the

responsibility to do so.

14

Works Cited

Pacino, Al. Perf. Scent of a Woman. Dir. Martin Brest. Universal, 1992 (1998). DVD.

Ramage, John D. Rhetoric: A User’s Guide. New York: Pearson Longman, 2006. Print.

15