To compliment Public Speaking Rules!, Richard L. Weaver II, PhD has written public speaking
essays covering topics like the power of speech, fears and phobias,
leadership, and editorial on Martin Luther King's "I have a dream
speech", and giving the speech of your life.
Click the links below for each essay.
It is a principle I have taught
for over thirty years. It is basic to speech-communication courses,
and it is essential to understanding what should be the foundation
of public-speaking effectiveness. In judging the success of a
public-speaking effort, you must look at the substance — support,
evidence, and ideas — of the speech, not just the delivery. Delivery
is merely a vehicle for conveying the substance. When I learned to
put delivery in its proper perspective, it was within the context of
Plato’s attack on rhetoric as “mere cookery.”
Plato was critical of the idea that rhetoric should be called an
art, while Aristotle argued in On Rhetoric that it was indeed an
art. Plato’s perspective on rhetoric has not been uncommon
throughout the ages, namely, that rhetoric is no art at all but
merely practiced flattery. The “fantastical banquet” of words is
“mere cookery in words”; words that are plain and to the point are
all that are needed. Through the character of Socrates he concludes
it is no art. He goes on at length to explain that rhetoric is
merely a form of flattery, and more comparable to cookery than to
medicine.
Plato’s perspective was well supported in a column entitled, “Obama
is the candidate of passion rather than substance,” (The (Toledo)
Blade, Jan. 13, 2008) in which Kathleen Parker
argues that “it’s easy to be seduced by a charming idea with a
dazzling smile....It’s all about hope, really.”
Of course, Obama isn’t the first to depend on “grandiose prose and
inspiring rhetoric” to supply his political pitch. Speech that
depends on rhythm and refrain is alluring. It can make anything,
even a simple chair, seem magnificent.
It is important to understand here how easily and willingly the
public is seduced by the power of speech. Remember that the Nazis
put enormous effort into public speaking. A. E. Frauenfeld, a Nazi
Gauleiter (leader), wrote in “Die Macht der Rede” in 1937, about the
power of speech, “We connect the spoken word with thoughts of the
person who spoke it, with his appearance, the sound of his voice,
the persuasiveness and passion with which he spoke the
words....Speaking is communal; many hundreds or thousands share the
enthusiasm.”
Ronald Reagan, a former actor and baseball announcer, understood
this. Not only did he speak “in warm, velvety tones that enveloped
listeners and made them feel good,” but, too, writes David Gergen, a
Reagan speechwriter, in Essence of Power (1984), in his speeches he
evoked what America had been and could be again, using terms,
stories, and images embracing liberty, heroism, honor, a love of
country, and a love of God. These values went deep with Reagan who
discovered them from years on the speaking circuit.
There is no doubt that there are times that call for seminal
speeches when substance matters less than delivery. Lory Hough and
Aine Cryts, in their online essay, “The Power of Speech,” cite
Abraham Lincoln’s “Gettysburg Address” that commemorated the most
devastating battle of the Civil War, or his “Emancipation
Proclamation” that called for an end to slavery. They cite Franklin
D. Roosevelt’s fireside chats that helped pull America out of the
depression and Ronald Reagan’s speech in 1986 following the
Challenger disaster that soothed a stunned nation. President George
W. Bush provided one voice following the September 11 terrorist
attacks. Hough and Cryts also mention Robert Kennedy’s 1968
impromptu Indianapolis announcement that Martin Luther King, Jr.,
had just been shot and Richard Nixon’s 1952 “Checkers” speech.
Nixon’s “Checkers” speech, according to Hough and Cryts, is
“considered to be one of the most successful political speeches in
history. Just chosen as Dwight D. Eisenhower’s running mate, Nixon
had to clear his name from charges of having a secret campaign fund.
With his wife sitting beside him, he apologized and called on
people’s emotions, using these words to end his emotional appeal
after explaining that a Texas supporter had sent a cocker spaniel to
the family as a gift. “Our little girl Tricia, the six-year-old,
named it Checkers. And you know, the kids, like all kids,” Nixon
said affectionately, “loved the dog, and I just want to say this,
right now, that regardless of what they say about it, we are going
to keep it.”
There are times that call for the rhetoric that unites or soothes or
commemorates. There are times, as well, that call for impromptu
comments that explain or clarify. The bulk of a politician’s
rhetoric, however, is carefully planned.
Barack Obama is a powerful speaker. Biblical cadences come naturally
to him, just as if he is a great preacher. He has extraordinary
rapport with ordinary Americans, and he possesses, as well, a unique
ability to articulate, in a generous way, their polite but burning
anger at the state and their country. Obama certainly has the
potential to “unite” the American public in ways that few, if any,
politicians have since Bobby Kennedy.
Obama’s appeal, however, is to the soul (hope). He preaches the
politics of “not-yet-here,” and it resonates deeply with his
listeners. There is no doubt that his rhetoric soars and takes
flight, but it alights nowhere. There is no doubt that he declares
that together we can do anything, but he doesn’t mention any of the
things we can do. What is missing from his repertoire is a clear
articulation of his intentions. Avoiding detailed policy
prescriptions, which bore many voters, leaves him open to attacks.
To depend on delivery and high-flown language alone, to the near
exclusion of any substance, is an example of what Plato complained
about. Obama’s speeches are a “fantastical banquet” of words or
“mere cookery in words.” It may be what Americans want, but in no
way is it what Americans need. Although some may say this is a time
for seminal speeches when substance matters less than delivery, but
I claim, as Kathleen Parker does, “Hope is not a policy.”
“Mr. Obama isn’t just the inevitable dream candidate,” writes
Parker, “He is the self-object of Oprah Nation [referring to Oprah
Winfrey’s campaigning on his behalf], love child of the therapeutic
generation. What he brings to the table,” Parker continues, “no one
quite knows. But what he delivers to the couch is human Prozac.”
To be seduced by delivery with little or no substance is to miss
what is significant, meaningful, and important. It is to be seduced
by the icing and overlook the cake, to judge a book by its cover and
ignore its contents, and to be persuaded by facial expressions
without noticing what the speaker is saying. It is, however, a
testament to the power of speech!
There is no doubt about the important
role that fear plays when it comes to public speaking. Public-speaking
anxiety is a disturbance of mind regarding a forthcoming public-speaking
event for which you are the speaker. As a fear, it ranks higher than the
fear of death. It is nearly universal, yet it obviously doesn’t prevent
successful speeches. Not only is it widely proclaimed, but it is widely
written about as well. In this essay I want to offer a philosophical
perspective that I have written about in my textbook, Communicating
Effectively (McGraw-Hill), but which has the potential for overcoming it
if practiced regularly.
Here is the key to this approach: Focus on your speech as a
communication task, not as a performance. Most speakers with stage
fright view speeches as performances. In viewing speeches as
performances, the goal of speakers is to satisfy an audience of critics.
That is, they realize their audience members will be analyzing and
criticizing their performance just as movie critics go to movies with a
different purpose and point of view than ordinary movie goers.
There are other characteristics of such a performance orientation, too.
Speakers view the speech as a formal talk, and because of the formality,
they tend to “put on” a false front or engage in somewhat artificial
behavior. The public speech, thus, is an extraordinary, exceptional, and
unusual situation undertaken in unfamiliar circumstances. Because of
this, speakers feel they must follow proper behaviors to be correct, and
their results — how effective they are in connecting with their
listeners — depends on polish, eloquence, and refinement.
The problem with a performance orientation is simple: effective public
speaking is more like ordinary communication encounters than like a
public performances. This is an important insight. Just as I
characterized the performance orientation, above, let’s look at the
characteristics of a communication orientation to see the differences.
First, the goal changes. No longer are speakers trying to satisfy an
audience of critics; they are, instead, sharing ideas with an audience.
And the goal of listeners is not to analyze and criticize, it is,
rather, to show interest in and even learn from what speakers have to
say.
There are other characteristics as well. With a communication
orientation, speakers must realize that public speaking is similar to
everyday conversation, thus, it is normal, natural behavior — not
formal, put-on, or artificial. When your communication becomes common,
ordinary, and average, rather than extraordinary, exceptional, and
unusual, a whole new mindset takes place that signals speakers that this
is a normal activity with which they are familiar. Being something that
is standard and routine, they can approach public-speaking opportunities
as occasions they can face realistically and approach in a pragmatic,
matter-of-fact, down-to-earth manner.
With a communication orientation, speakers frame the entire
public-speaking situation in a familiar way. Their speeches will reveal
genuine and true expressions of themselves, not behaviors that must
adhere to some standard of proper conduct. No longer does their effort
depend on polish, eloquence, and refinement; their results depend simply
on whether or not they shared their message.
Do these differences make a difference? A communication orientation has
several advantages for speakers. First, and I am quoting my textbook
here [without using quotation marks] it means that all those negative
past public performances you may have had — from elementary school
through high school — can be deleted from your memory. After all, those
were “performances,” and they no longer fall under your new mindset,
your communication orientation.
Second, you do not have to memorize your speech. Performances create
anxiety because of the fear of forgetting words, thoughts, or your place
in the speech. One of the biggest fears people have regarding giving
speeches is forgetting what they have to say during the speech. It is
being embarrassed which is the overpowering thought. Think about it, how
often do you have memory blocks during conversations with others?
Seldom, of course. When you are talking with others during speeches, you
are having a conversation with your listeners, not talking at them.
The third advantage of a communication orientation is that speakers can
focus on their real purpose in speaking to their listeners — getting
audience members to accept and understand their information or change
their attitude or actions. There is an important and worthwhile
consideration here that may help speakers change their focus: Listeners
are more interested in what speakers have to say than in evaluating
their performance.
One thing that happens when speakers change from a performance to a
communication perspective is that they become less concerned about
themselves—the performer—and more concerned about their mission.
Performers have to be concerned about their performance for that’s what
they live for. Now, with a communication perspective, speakers can stop
their preoccupation with themselves, “How do I look?’ “How will I do?”
“What will they think of me?” “Will they like me?” This is a major
re-orientation because it will quiet their mind by reducing the amount
of self-chatter. They will be able to stop defending their ego against
failure and criticism. Threats to their ego have no real implications
now.
What all of this means is that if speakers dress in comfortable clothes,
practice positive self-talk, are well prepared, picture (visualize)
themselves doing well, take several deep breaths before speaking, pick
out friendly faces and make eye contact with them, and plan to offer a
reward after the speech, all the elements of potential distraction will
have been eliminated, and all the elements of comfort, encouragement,
and support will be supplied so that the communication orientation has a
real opportunity to work at full capacity.
Speakers can do all of the things recommended for eliminating, or at
least reducing, the fear of public speaking. There are many of these,
and what works for one person may not work as well for another. The
overarching, umbrella-like concept, however, that can make it all happen
— whatever the individual elements employed — may just be a broader,
more comprehensive principle. To adopt a communication perspective
rather than a performance perspective may be the very key that unlocks
the door to confidence, comfort, and effective public speaking.
Let’s just say that as things have
worked out in your life, that what you would like to have more than
anything else comes down to giving what must be considered the speech of
your life. How you come across, how you present yourself, and how you
affect a group of people, is going to determine whether or not you get
what you want.
The speech of your life comes from you, and your success depends on your
message, you the messenger, and your magic. You can think about your
message being the meat, you the messenger being the potatoes, and the
magic being the spice. Let’s look at each factor.
The meat of your message depends first on study. Study is what makes
greatness. Whether it is based on your own background, the experiences
you’ve had, or research and investigation, great speeches reveal a depth
of knowledge and understanding.
When your message comes from deep within you, it reveals your soul. Soul
is that animating essence that we associate with your life. A great
message is not just words; it is emotion, body language, and passion or
spirit. People listen to your soul.
Finally, in a great message speakers share their scars. They reach into
their storehouse for the blemishes, faults, and sores that make them
human. Sharing their scars makes them human.
The important aspect of you as the messenger is that you be yourself.
Know who you are. To know who you are, be a self-monitor. Examine why
you do the things you do, why you say what you say, and why you think
what you think. Look at your behavior.
Be introspective. Examine your thoughts and feelings. This involves
self-searching, self-reflection, and self-contemplation. Know yourself,
and show yourself. Tear away the veil, and reveal the true you—who you
really are.
As a messenger, you must be sincere. This means being open, candid,
frank, honest, and truthful. When the covers of your book are opened,
are your contents thin, superficial, and shallow? Then enrich yourself
by reading, listening, observing, and experiencing.
Finally, as the messenger, be direct with your audience. Let your
audience understand what you know. Develop and polish rich, personal,
soul-wrenching stories that will grab, hold, and bind your audience’s
attention to your message.
As the messenger, you must project confidence (positive self-assurance),
credibility (an authentic, believable, convincing, and trustworthy
nature), comfort (that you are pleased and satisfied with your ideas),
success (accomplishment, achievement, attainment, and victory), and
polish (that you have spent some time perfecting, refining, and
improving your ideas).
In public speaking, nobody asks for perfection; they can, however,
expect polish!
Your magic represents the spice. It can be revealed in your writing, in
your delivery, and in your embellishment. “Magic” does not come from
supernatural powers or slight of hand. It comes from careful,
thoughtful, planning and preparation.
Write out some of your ideas. Use antithesis (opposites), or the setting
of one clause or other member of a sentence against another to which it
is opposed. “It’s nice to be important, but it’s more important to be
nice.” “What counts is not the number of hours you put in, but how much
you put in the hours.”
Effective writing, too, utilizes parallel structure. Sometimes referred
to as continuums, serializing, or stacking, it occurs when ideas of
equal worth are given the same syntactical form. From the famous poem
constructed in parallel form, “Children Learn What They Live,” by
Dorothy Law Nolte, just two lines as examples: “If a child lives with
criticism, he learns to condemn. If a child lives with hostility, he
learns to fight....” At the end of Martin Luther King’s “I Have A
Dream,” speech: “So, let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of
New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New
York....”
Effective writing utilizes triplets, or, a list of three things. A list
of three is always better than either two or four. Three is always more
than four! “People are born, people live, people die!” “If you want to
enrich today, plant flowers. If you want to enrich years, plant trees.
If you want to enrich eternity, plant ideas.”
Your delivery, too, contributes to the magic. Rehearse, rehearse,
rehearse. Delivery is a tool for expressing clear, interesting ideas
without distracting the audience. Effective delivery is conveyed by your
voice, language, and body.
Your voice is the sales tool that can sell your feelings and emotions.
It is the most powerful, persuasive, professional tool you own. Vary
your pitch (the highness or lowness of your voice), select the best rate
(it depends on your personality, the mood you’re trying to create, the
nature of your audience and the occasion), and avoid vocalized pauses (uhms,
and ahhhs). Pauses are for time to breathe, for messages to sink in, to
give listeners time to breathe, and for emphasis.
Language is important, and effective word choice can be magic. Study all
your life to be a wordsmith—one who knows, works with, and shapes words.
Pronounce words correctly, because incorrect pronunciation strips away
credibility. Use proper grammar; it is a key indicator of who you are
and what your background is.
Your body is an important part of your delivery. Pay attention to your
posture, personal appearance, facial expressions, eye contact, and hands
(forget your hands, but don’t forget to use them). And, never give your
ideas to an audience; give your speech to individuals in your audience.
Connect with one individual at a time. Weak eye contact looks insincere,
insecure, and uncomfortable.
Finally, embellish your speech by telling key stories, using power
phrases (“Attitude, not aptitude, determines altitude”), and using humor
and quotations. Don’t use humor to get a laugh; use it to revitalize
your audience. The best humor occurs naturally.
The speech of your life comes from you. Now, when you are faced with
giving the speech of your life, you know you have control over the
message, the messenger, and the magic. The real greatness within you
awaits your recognition.
For thirty years in the college
classroom, I have always believed that I was teaching the future leaders
of our nation. For this reason, in the teaching of speech communication,
an underlying foundation for all the concepts and principles I taught
was the belief that they would contribute positively to effective
leadership. In addition, I tried to motivate students to not just take
seriously the knowledge and information they were gaining but to
constantly apply it to their classes, experiences outside the classroom,
and their lives. What good is theory to students if it has no practical
application? (I am indebted to Hastings and Potter’s book Trust Me (WaterBrook,
2004), for many of the ideas in this essay.)
The best place to begin looking at
leadership, of course, is exactly at the point where students are
beginning their college careers—when they are becoming effective and
committed learners. The best learners are those who regularly seek
criticism and feedback, possess an attitude of optimism and persistence,
learn from other people’s failures and successes, have a wide range of
interests and move easily into new endeavors, enjoy many different kinds
of people, make it a point to tune into and pick up on what’s going on
around them, and take time to pause and reflect as they think about
themselves, their life experiences, and how the two intersect. They
should learn from the old proverb, “We cannot direct the wind, but we
can adjust the sails.” The more flexibility, the more they will succeed.
Even with the qualities above for
being effective and committed learners, some students have erected walls
within themselves that prevent the receipt, acceptance, and use of the
very information that can help them. The first is pride, which is pure
selfishness. It closes the mind to new truths, causes inflexibility,
resists change, and gets in the way of asking others for help. The
second is a judgmental attitude which creates a negative, cynical
attitude. A third wall is stubbornness that is revealed in an attachment
to personal, immediate gratification.
There are other walls that prevent the
receipt, acceptance, and use of information, too. A fourth wall is
stagnation. Those who have allowed themselves to stagnate become
apathetic, purposeless, and their attention is scattered rather than
focused. Insensitivity is a fifth wall, and results in lack of concern
for others, no empathy, an uncaring attitude, and an inability to
listen. A sixth wall is dishonesty. In addition to cheating, lying, or
stealing, dishonesty happens when people seek to get ahead by
deviousness—game playing, manipulation, and pretense. Finally, a seventh
wall is those who are always seeking the easiest solution or decision.
These folks avoid problems, responsibilities, and difficulties. Having
lost the will to grow, they lack perseverance, endurance, and courage.
What are the qualities effective
leaders need? There are three important qualities: values, vision, and
communication. First, their personal values reflect what they consider
to be important. Their values are motivators that give them reasons for
why they do or don’t do things. They drive behavior. Right actions flow
out of right values such as integrity, honesty, human dignity, service,
excellence, growth, and evenhandedness. Second, they need vision—the
ability to look farther than today, over potential obstacles, and beyond
majority opinion. They are able to gaze across the horizon of time and
imagine greater things ahead—the ability to see what is not yet reality.
Vision is difficult to cultivate. It
comes, for example, from a strong belief that things don’t have to be
this way. It comes from a vague desire to do something that will
challenge yourself and others. It comes from a sense of determination.
It forces you to clarify what it is that you really want to do. With a
vision, you get a sense of what you want your target to look like, feel
like, and be like when you and others have completed the journey. Having
a vision affects your attitude, your optimism, and your beliefs. Your
beliefs will sustain you through difficult times. Vision requires both
commitment and endurance, and when you have a vision you don’t see
difficulties in every opportunity but, rather, opportunities in every
difficulty.
The third quality effective leaders
need is communication. Rather than beginning with the obvious
characteristics of verbal acuity, decision-making, and powerful
delivery, the most important aspect of communication is a deep
commitment to listening to others. How can an effective leader
understand the needs of his or her listeners, let alone employees,
customers, suppliers, or market without listening to them? They need to
listen with an intent to understand—turning the focus from themselves to
the other person.
Effective listening encompasses the
all-important quality of empathy—identifying with and understanding
ideas from another’s situation, feelings, and motives. When others know
they are accepted, recognized, and understood for their special gifts
and talents, they are more willing to listen and respond.
In addition to listening,
communication involves persuasion—engaging others with the specific
intent of changing their beliefs or actions. Effective leaders seek
change through true compassion rather than by forcing compliance—to
build consensus rather than to assert authoritarian power. To be an
effective persuader requires the careful analysis of audience wants,
needs, values, beliefs, and interests. It requires the prudent
organization of ideas, amassing reliable and verifiable supporting
material, and thoughtful and cautious examination of all related ethical
issues and considerations.
If leaders want to persuade
effectively, they must act with integrity. That is, they must act
boldly—as one who has unshakable confidence. They must exhibit a great
attitude—with a positive, encouraging, and uplifting mind-set. Finally,
they must develop trust through a record that is dependable and
consistent and a lifestyle that sets an example of integrity and
competence.
LLeadership is not a bag of tricks, a
set of mechanical rules, or a rigid regimen of automatic methods.
Leaders must see the goodness of people, appreciate their assets and
abilities, and capitalize on their unique assets and abilities through
energy, effective interaction, and empowerment. To do this, they need
resourcefulness, initiative, imagination, and adaptation of their own
best abilities and skills. With these assets, they will be able to
diagnose situations, prescribe methods of leading from the reality of
those situations, and understand that everyone’s reality is different.
Let’s just say that as things have
worked out in your life, that what you would like to have more than
anything else comes down to giving what must be considered the speech of
your life. How you come across, how you present yourself, and how you
affect a group of people, is going to determine whether or not you get
what you want.
The speech of your life comes from you, and your success depends on your
message, you the messenger, and your magic. You can think about your
message being the meat, you the messenger being the potatoes, and the
magic being the spice. Let’s look at each factor.
The meat of your message depends first on study. Study is what makes
greatness. Whether it is based on your own background, the experiences
you’ve had, or research and investigation, great speeches reveal a depth
of knowledge and understanding.
When your message comes from deep within you, it reveals your soul. Soul
is that animating essence that we associate with your life. A great
message is not just words; it is emotion, body language, and passion or
spirit. People listen to your soul.
Finally, in a great message speakers share their scars. They reach into
their storehouse for the blemishes, faults, and sores that make them
human. Sharing their scars makes them human.
The important aspect of you as the messenger is that you be yourself.
Know who you are. To know who you are, be a self-monitor. Examine why
you do the things you do, why you say what you say, and why you think
what you think. Look at your behavior.
Be introspective. Examine your thoughts and feelings. This involves
self-searching, self-reflection, and self-contemplation. Know yourself,
and show yourself. Tear away the veil, and reveal the true you—who you
really are.
As a messenger, you must be sincere. This means being open, candid,
frank, honest, and truthful. When the covers of your book are opened,
are your contents thin, superficial, and shallow? Then enrich yourself
by reading, listening, observing, and experiencing.
Finally, as the messenger, be direct with your audience. Let your
audience understand what you know. Develop and polish rich, personal,
soul-wrenching stories that will grab, hold, and bind your audience’s
attention to your message.
As the messenger, you must project confidence (positive self-assurance),
credibility (an authentic, believable, convincing, and trustworthy
nature), comfort (that you are pleased and satisfied with your ideas),
success (accomplishment, achievement, attainment, and victory), and
polish (that you have spent some time perfecting, refining, and
improving your ideas).
In public speaking, nobody asks for perfection; they can, however,
expect polish!
Your magic represents the spice. It can be revealed in your writing, in
your delivery, and in your embellishment. “Magic” does not come from
supernatural powers or slight of hand. It comes from careful,
thoughtful, planning and preparation.
Write out some of your ideas. Use antithesis (opposites), or the setting
of one clause or other member of a sentence against another to which it
is opposed. “It’s nice to be important, but it’s more important to be
nice.” “What counts is not the number of hours you put in, but how much
you put in the hours.”
Effective writing, too, utilizes parallel structure. Sometimes referred
to as continuums, serializing, or stacking, it occurs when ideas of
equal worth are given the same syntactical form. From the famous poem
constructed in parallel form, “Children Learn What They Live,” by
Dorothy Law Nolte, just two lines as examples: “If a child lives with
criticism, he learns to condemn. If a child lives with hostility, he
learns to fight....” At the end of Martin Luther King’s “I Have A
Dream,” speech: “So, let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of
New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New
York....”
Effective writing utilizes triplets, or, a list of three things. A list
of three is always better than either two or four. Three is always more
than four! “People are born, people live, people die!” “If you want to
enrich today, plant flowers. If you want to enrich years, plant trees.
If you want to enrich eternity, plant ideas.”
Your delivery, too, contributes to the magic. Rehearse, rehearse,
rehearse. Delivery is a tool for expressing clear, interesting ideas
without distracting the audience. Effective delivery is conveyed by your
voice, language, and body.
Your voice is the sales tool that can sell your feelings and emotions.
It is the most powerful, persuasive, professional tool you own. Vary
your pitch (the highness or lowness of your voice), select the best rate
(it depends on your personality, the mood you’re trying to create, the
nature of your audience and the occasion), and avoid vocalized pauses (uhms,
and ahhhs). Pauses are for time to breathe, for messages to sink in, to
give listeners time to breathe, and for emphasis.
Language is important, and effective word choice can be magic. Study all
your life to be a wordsmith—one who knows, works with, and shapes words.
Pronounce words correctly, because incorrect pronunciation strips away
credibility. Use proper grammar; it is a key indicator of who you are
and what your background is.
Your body is an important part of your delivery. Pay attention to your
posture, personal appearance, facial expressions, eye contact, and hands
(forget your hands, but don’t forget to use them). And, never give your
ideas to an audience; give your speech to individuals in your audience.
Connect with one individual at a time. Weak eye contact looks insincere,
insecure, and uncomfortable.
Finally, embellish your speech by telling key stories, using power
phrases (“Attitude, not aptitude, determines altitude”), and using humor
and quotations. Don’t use humor to get a laugh; use it to revitalize
your audience. The best humor occurs naturally.
The speech of your life comes from you. Now, when you are faced with
giving the speech of your life, you know you have control over the
message, the messenger, and the magic. The real greatness within you
awaits your recognition.
It is a principle I have taught for
over thirty years. It is basic to speech-communication courses, and it
is essential to understanding what should be the foundation of
public-speaking effectiveness. In judging the success of a
public-speaking effort, you must look at the substance — support,
evidence, and ideas — of the speech, not just the delivery. Delivery is
merely a vehicle for conveying the substance. When I learned to put
delivery in its proper perspective, it was within the context of Plato’s
attack on rhetoric as “mere cookery.”
Plato was critical of the idea that rhetoric should be called an art,
while Aristotle argued in On Rhetoric that it was indeed an art. Plato’s
perspective on rhetoric has not been uncommon throughout the ages,
namely, that rhetoric is no art at all but merely practiced flattery.
The “fantastical banquet” of words is “mere cookery in words”; words
that are plain and to the point are all that are needed. Through the
character of Socrates he concludes it is no art. He goes on at length to
explain that rhetoric is merely a form of flattery, and more comparable
to cookery than to medicine.
Plato’s perspective was well supported in a column entitled, “Obama is
the candidate of passion rather than substance,” (The (Toledo) Blade,
Jan. 13, 2008) in which Kathleen Parker
argues that “it’s easy to be seduced by a charming idea with a dazzling
smile....It’s all about hope, really.”
Of course, Obama isn’t the first to depend on “grandiose prose and
inspiring rhetoric” to supply his political pitch. Speech that depends
on rhythm and refrain is alluring. It can make anything, even a simple
chair, seem magnificent.
It is important to understand here how easily and willingly the public
is seduced by the power of speech. Remember that the Nazis put enormous
effort into public speaking. A. E. Frauenfeld, a Nazi Gauleiter
(leader), wrote in “Die Macht der Rede” in 1937, about the power of
speech, “We connect the spoken word with thoughts of the person who
spoke it, with his appearance, the sound of his voice, the
persuasiveness and passion with which he spoke the words....Speaking is
communal; many hundreds or thousands share the enthusiasm.”
Ronald Reagan, a former actor and baseball announcer, understood this.
Not only did he speak “in warm, velvety tones that enveloped listeners
and made them feel good,” but, too, writes David Gergen, a Reagan
speechwriter, in Essence of Power (1984), in his speeches he evoked what
America had been and could be again, using terms, stories, and images
embracing liberty, heroism, honor, a love of country, and a love of God.
These values went deep with Reagan who discovered them from years on the
speaking circuit.
There is no doubt that there are times that call for seminal speeches
when substance matters less than delivery. Lory Hough and Aine Cryts, in
their online essay, “The Power of Speech,” cite Abraham Lincoln’s
“Gettysburg Address” that commemorated the most devastating battle of
the Civil War, or his “Emancipation Proclamation” that called for an end
to slavery. They cite Franklin D. Roosevelt’s fireside chats that helped
pull America out of the depression and Ronald Reagan’s speech in 1986
following the Challenger disaster that soothed a stunned nation.
President George W. Bush provided one voice following the September 11
terrorist attacks. Hough and Cryts also mention Robert Kennedy’s 1968
impromptu Indianapolis announcement that Martin Luther King, Jr., had
just been shot and Richard Nixon’s 1952 “Checkers” speech.
Nixon’s “Checkers” speech, according to Hough and Cryts, is “considered
to be one of the most successful political speeches in history. Just
chosen as Dwight D. Eisenhower’s running mate, Nixon had to clear his
name from charges of having a secret campaign fund. With his wife
sitting beside him, he apologized and called on people’s emotions, using
these words to end his emotional appeal after explaining that a Texas
supporter had sent a cocker spaniel to the family as a gift. “Our little
girl Tricia, the six-year-old, named it Checkers. And you know, the
kids, like all kids,” Nixon said affectionately, “loved the dog, and I
just want to say this, right now, that regardless of what they say about
it, we are going to keep it.”
There are times that call for the rhetoric that unites or soothes or
commemorates. There are times, as well, that call for impromptu comments
that explain or clarify. The bulk of a politician’s rhetoric, however,
is carefully planned.
Barack Obama is a powerful speaker. Biblical cadences come naturally to
him, just as if he is a great preacher. He has extraordinary rapport
with ordinary Americans, and he possesses, as well, a unique ability to
articulate, in a generous way, their polite but burning anger at the
state and their country. Obama certainly has the potential to “unite”
the American public in ways that few, if any, politicians have since
Bobby Kennedy.
Obama’s appeal, however, is to the soul (hope). He preaches the politics
of “not-yet-here,” and it resonates deeply with his listeners. There is
no doubt that his rhetoric soars and takes flight, but it alights
nowhere. There is no doubt that he declares that together we can do
anything, but he doesn’t mention any of the things we can do. What is
missing from his repertoire is a clear articulation of his intentions.
Avoiding detailed policy prescriptions, which bore many voters, leaves
him open to attacks.
To depend on delivery and high-flown language alone, to the near
exclusion of any substance, is an example of what Plato complained
about. Obama’s speeches are a “fantastical banquet” of words or “mere
cookery in words.” It may be what Americans want, but in no way is it
what Americans need. Although some may say this is a time for seminal
speeches when substance matters less than delivery, but I claim, as
Kathleen Parker does, “Hope is not a policy.”
“Mr. Obama isn’t just the inevitable dream candidate,” writes Parker,
“He is the self-object of Oprah Nation [referring to Oprah Winfrey’s
campaigning on his behalf], love child of the therapeutic generation.
What he brings to the table,” Parker continues, “no one quite knows. But
what he delivers to the couch is human Prozac.”
To be seduced by delivery with little or no substance is to miss what is
significant, meaningful, and important. It is to be seduced by the icing
and overlook the cake, to judge a book by its cover and ignore its
contents, and to be persuaded by facial expressions without noticing
what the speaker is saying. It is, however, a testament to the power of
speech!
