Speech

Helen Clark speaks as Prime Minister of New Zealand at Sir Edmund Hillary’s state funeral. The supplied source describes an adaptation of her tribute published in the New Zealand Herald on 22 January 2008.

For this standalone reading, use our practice question: How does Clark shape the audience’s response to Hillary’s life and legacy? This is an original teaching question, not a question printed beside the extract in the examination.

The tribute connects Hillary’s extraordinary achievements with qualities listeners can value and practice. It invites pride and grief, but ends by making compassion an attainable legacy. Read both source pages before focusing on individual passages. The transcript follows the supplied adaptation; the official government transcript is linked for context and includes material omitted here.

This is a reading of the words, not a reconstruction of the performance. Repetition and short sentences allow us to discuss emphasis and rhythm without inventing Clark’s gestures, pauses or the audience’s reactions. The walkthrough and model writing are original teaching material.

The opening places “a young New Zealander” on Everest alongside Tenzing Norgay before naming Hillary. That movement gives the familiar hero a national and human starting point. His later fame grows from the young person introduced in the first sentence.

The repeated “He went” builds a sequence of reasons to admire the ascent. Clark identifies the unprecedented height, the limitations of “1950s, not 21st Century, technology,” and the skills developed in several places. The repeated opening gives listeners a stable pattern while the details accumulate.

“But above all” ranks attitude above those circumstances and skills. The further repetition of “with” gives goal, courage and determination a cumulative weight. The passage does more than list what happened: it directs attention toward what the achievement reveals about Hillary.

The following sentence connects that determination with pragmatism and humility. This matters because the tribute will later ask listeners to value qualities they can share, not simply marvel at a feat few could repeat. Tenzing is named at the opening and again later; do not turn the tribute into a claim that Hillary climbed alone.

“Today” moves the speech from the remembered ascent to the funeral occasion. Clark names Lady Hillary, Peter and Sarah and acknowledges that their loss is “personal and profound.” The repeated language of sharing respects the family’s particular grief while recognizing a wider farewell.

“We mourn as a nation” then enlarges the group. The reason given is intimate: “we are saying goodbye to a friend.” Calling Hillary part of the “New Zealand family” extends the language of kinship beyond his actual relatives. The nation becomes a community joined by affection and loss.

Clark makes room for different degrees of personal connection: “a lot, a little, or not at all.” This sequence includes listeners who never met Hillary without claiming that their grief is identical to his family’s. Her initial acknowledgment of the family helps sustain that distinction.

The movement across parents, grandparents and “today’s children” extends belonging through time. Clark’s brief “My” places her own family inside the collective memory. Admiration becomes gratitude for having lived alongside a “living legend,” giving the mourning a sense of shared privilege as well as loss.

Clark returns to Everest and enlarges the challenge: it had defeated fifteen expeditions and seemed beyond “mere mortals.” This elevated description makes success look exceptional. Yet the next paragraph identifies Hillary as “a beekeeper from New Zealand” alongside Tenzing, a Sherpa from Nepal.

That contrast brings extraordinary achievement into contact with ordinary identity. The modest occupation prevents the hero from appearing wholly separate from everyday life. The repeated partnership also gives both climbers a place in the historical achievement.

The later tractor detail performs related work. “In Kiwi style” associates a practical, unglamorous vehicle with the national character Clark is celebrating. The concise sentence can introduce warmth into the account of polar exploration. We can explain that tonal possibility without asserting that the audience laughed.

These details support the tribute’s combination of grandeur and familiarity. Hillary can be a world figure and “Sir Ed,” someone the audience is invited to recognize as one of its own.

The account moves from exploration to the Himalayan Trust, education, health services, patronage and diplomacy. These details widen the meaning of achievement. Hillary’s significance includes what his status allowed him to do for other people, in Nepal as well as New Zealand.

“Living legacy” is especially important in a funeral tribute. Although the person has died, the work described continues to matter. The phrase directs attention toward a lasting benefit rather than only a completed adventure. The examples give substance to the later praise of service.

Clark then contrasts Hillary’s own account of “modest abilities” with “a colossus.” The enlarged image honors his stature while preserving humility as part of his character. The short statements that follow—“He was our hero. He brought fame to our country”—give public achievement a firm, memorable shape.

The second “But above all” changes the emphasis again. “We admired his achievements” becomes “we loved Sir Ed for what he represented.” The contrast moves from accomplishment and reputation to attachment and values: determination, humility, fairness and service. It does not reject his fame; it explains why the tribute regards his character as more important.

The closing comparison makes that priority practical. Clark concedes that listeners may not match Hillary’s “abilities or strength,” but insists that “we can all strive” to match his humanity and compassion. The repeated “match” holds the two possibilities together while distinguishing what is exceptional from what is open to everyone.

“Strive” asks for effort rather than promising that every listener will instantly equal him. This makes the invitation both inclusive and demanding. The tribute turns a life to admire into a standard for future conduct without asking the audience to become mountaineers.

“His values were strong; they are timeless; and they will endure” moves through past, present and future. Its parallel clauses give the ending a sense of continuation: death does not end the relevance of those values. The final wish that Hillary “rest in peace” returns to the immediate purpose of a funeral farewell.

The closing therefore holds consolation and responsibility together. Listeners can honour the loss by carrying something forward, while the speaker still gives the dead person a respectful leave-taking.

A possible thesis

Clark presents Hillary as an extraordinary achiever whose humility and service made him a familiar national figure. Her tribute connects pride with shared loss, then encourages listeners to continue his example through compassion rather than feats of physical achievement.

Choose a manageable argument

A response could examine how achievement is made to reveal character, how family language creates shared mourning, and how the ending makes that character an example for listeners. Select evidence that develops those ideas; you do not need to retell every event in the tribute. This is one possible structure, not a requirement to write three paragraphs or divide the speech into three appeals.

Model paragraph

Clark makes Hillary’s example something listeners can try to follow. She first acknowledges that “we may not be able to match” his abilities or strength. She then turns to what “we can all strive to match”: his humanity and compassion. Repeating “match” connects two kinds of achievement. Physical feats may be beyond the listeners, but care for others is presented as possible for everyone. “We” includes Clark in this effort, while “all” extends it across the audience. The word “strive” also suggests that following his example will take work. The tribute gives mourners a way to honor Hillary through their own actions, as well as admire what he achieved.

The paragraph follows one contrast and explains its development. It connects grammar, word choice and audience without making unsupported claims about delivery or treating every listener’s response as certain.

Write a paragraph connecting the acknowledgment of Hillary’s actual family with the later “New Zealand family.” Explain how Clark widens the circle of mourning while recognizing different relationships to him.

Alternatively, compare the two uses of “But above all.” What does each give priority to, and how do they prepare the final invitation to emulate Hillary’s compassion?

Before exporting, check that each claim about an audience response is supported by the language. If you describe a pause, gesture, applause or change in volume, ask whether the supplied source actually records it.

For another speech, begin again with its occasion. A campaign address may seek a decision, a lecture may guide understanding, and a protest may build solidarity. Transfer the method of tracing voice, structure and audience; do not import this tribute’s movement from mourning to legacy.