The Decline of Public Speaking

Unlike many people, I enjoy public speaking. I've been a member of several Toastmasters International clubs over the years, and have won prizes in public speaking contests. I've spoken in front of audiences as small as two and as large as more than a thousand, and often serve as a master of ceremonies for various events. I also judge high school speech and debate competitions (having been originally volunteered by my granddaughter, whose debate team needs to provide judges to participate in competitions). And while I enjoy public speaking, I also enjoy listening to a well-crafted, well-delivered speech that combines good preparation with skill of delivery appropriate to the subject and the occasion.

I've been thinking a lot about public speaking lately, because there isn't much of it that's very good any more. As Hansell Duckett once noted, "What this country needs is more free speech worth listening to."

I'm currently reading "Hitler: Ascent (1889-1939)," book one of a two-volume biography by Volker Ullrich. It's common nowadays to compare Der Furor to Hitler, and - as this detailed, thoroughly researched, and very readable biography demonstrates - comparisons of their personalities, methods, actions, and general behavior are very much on the mark ... with one major exception, as my friend Trang pointed out in her comment on my Facebook post recommending the book:

"There's one big difference between Hitler with his oratory skills and der Furor whose lack of eloquence is astounding. The man can't ever seem to utter a complete sentence that makes sense."

Trang's comment was spot-on. Whatever else he may have been, Adolf Hitler was a spellbinding orator with a brilliant ability to match his preparation and delivery to the audience. Der Furor, on the other hand, is a terrible speaker - his speeches are not the focused, compelling addresses of an educated statesman speaking with the gravitas of office, but stream-of-consciousness monologs, full of bizarre claims, childish insults, gross misrepresentations, rambling non sequiturs, and self-indulgent blather. It's a style he likes to call "the weave" as if it were some profoundly brilliant oratorical technique only he can master, and one that appeals to less-educated audiences with short attention spans, who want to be entertained rather than informed or persuaded. If Der Furor were to compete in any high school speech contest I was judging, I'd have to seek the organizer's permission to give him a low enough score.

Now consider last week's funeral of former president Jimmy Carter. Speaker after speaker gave heartfelt, excellent eulogies ... not an easy type of presentation to write or deliver. Each eulogy brilliantly mixed love, respect, and humor in memory of a man remembered less as a great president than as a decent and humble human being. I cannot imagine that Der Furor could have risen to the challenge of the moment, and I cringe* to think of what will happen if we need to have a state funeral while he is in office. In July of 2022 I wrote a blog post reimagining the Gettysburg Address as Der Furor would have  delivered it that can serve as an example of the sort of soaring presidential rhetoric we can expect again in the next four years.

A few years ago, drama and theater critic Peter Marks wrote, “... if you’ve ever listened to some of the desultory rhetoric from the well of the Senate, you know that American politics has not exactly built an assembly line of Ciceros.” We live in a time when attention spans are short and good public speaking is insufficiently valued. It's a time when crude tweets that sow hatred and division carry more weight than soaring oration that inspires and motivates. 

And that's sad.

Have a good day, and support your local school's speech and debate clubs.

More thoughts coming.

Bilbo

* Yes, I know it's on the banished words list for this year, but it just seemed right.