Public Speaking Part 16

Burke, in one great effort, declared he had no intention of dealing with the _right_ of taxation; he confined himself merely to the _expediency_ of Great Britain's revenue laws for America. Other great speakers have--in their finished speeches--just as clearly indicated the plans they have decided to follow. Such definite announcements determine the material of many introductions.

My task will be divided under three different heads: first, The Crime Against Kansas, in its origin and extent; secondly, The Apologies for the Crime; and, thirdly, The True Remedy.

CHARLES SUMNER: _The Crime against Kansas_, 1856

Mr. President and Fellow Citizens of New York:

The facts with which I shall deal this evening are mainly old and familiar; nor is there anything new in the general use I shall make of them. If there shall be any novelty, it will be in the mode of presenting the facts, and the inferences and observations following that presentation. In his speech last autumn at Columbus, Ohio, as reported in the _New York Times_, Senator Douglas said: "Our fathers, when they framed the government under which we live, understood this question just as well, and even better, than we do now."

I fully indorse this, and I adopt it as a text for this discourse. I so adopt it because it furnishes a precise and an agreed starting-point for a discussion between Republicans and that wing of the Democracy headed by Senator Douglas. It simply leaves the inquiry: What was the understanding those fathers had of the question mentioned?

ABRAHAM LINCOLN: _Cooper Union Speech_, 1860

Indicating the Plan in the Speech. In some finished and long speeches parts of the plan are distributed to mark the divisions in the progress of the development. The next quotation shows such an insertion.

And now sir, against all these theories and opinions, I maintain--

1. That the Const.i.tution of the United States is not a league, confederacy, or compact between the people of the several States in their sovereign capacities; but a government proper, founded on the adoption of the people, and creating direct relations between itself and individuals.

2. That no State authority has power to dissolve these relations; that nothing can dissolve them but revolution; and that, consequently, there can be no such thing as secession without revolution.

3. That there is a supreme law, consisting of the Const.i.tution of the United States, and acts of Congress pa.s.sed in pursuance of it, and treaties; and that, in cases not capable of a.s.suming the character of a suit in law or equity, Congress must judge of, and finally interpret, this supreme law so often as it has occasion to pa.s.s acts of legislation; and in cases capable of a.s.suming, and actually a.s.suming, the character of a suit, the Supreme Court of the United States is the final interpreter.

4. That an attempt by a State to abrogate, annul, or nullify an act of Congress, or to arrest its operation within her limits, on the ground that, in her opinion, such law is unconst.i.tutional, is a direct usurpation on the just powers of the general Government, and on the equal rights of other States; a plain violation of the Const.i.tution, a proceeding essentially revolutionary in its character and tendency.

DANIEL WEBSTER: _The Const.i.tution Not a Compact between Sovereign States_, 1833

Such a statement to the audience is especially helpful when the speaker is dealing with technical subjects, or material with which most people are not usually and widely conversant. Scientific considerations always become clearer when such plans are simply constructed, clearly announced, and plainly followed.

So far as I know, there are only three hypotheses which ever have been entertained, or which well can be entertained, respecting the past history of Nature. I will, in the first place, state the hypotheses, and then I will consider what evidence bearing upon them is in our possession, and by what light of criticism that evidence is to be interpreted. Upon the first hypothesis, the a.s.sumption is, that phenomena of Nature similar to those exhibited by the present world have always existed; in other words, that the universe has existed from all eternity in what may be broadly termed its present condition.

The second hypothesis is, that the present state of things has had only a limited duration; and that, at some period in the past, a condition of the world, essentially similar to that which we now know, came into existence, without any precedent condition from which it could have naturally proceeded. The a.s.sumption that successive states of Nature have arisen, each without any relation of natural causation to an antecedent state, is a mere modification of this second hypothesis.

The third hypothesis also a.s.sumes that the present state of things has had but a limited duration; but it supposes that this state has been evolved by a natural process from an antecedent state, and that from another, and so on; and, on this hypothesis, the attempt to a.s.sign any limit to the series of past changes is, usually, given up.

THOMAS H. HUXLEY: _Lectures on Evolution_, 1876

EXERCISES

1. According to what methods are the foregoing plans arranged? Which division in Sumner's speech was the most important? Was he trying to get his listeners to do anything? What do you think that object was?

2. In Lincoln's speech do you think he planned the material chronologically? Historically? What reasons have you for your answer?

3. Which of Webster's four parts is the most important? Give reasons for your answer.

4. Which hypothesis (what does the word mean?) did Huxley himself support? What induces you to think thus? Is this plan in any respect like Sumner's? Explain your answer.

5. Make a list of the ways in which material of speeches may be arranged.

Arrangement. Importance. If you have several topics to cover in a single speech where would you put the most important? First or last?

Write upon a piece of paper the position you choose. You have given this plan some thought so you doubtlessly put down the correct position. What did you write? First? That is usually the answer of nine pupils out of every ten. Are you with the majority? If you wrote that the most important topic should be treated first, you are wrong.

The speech would be badly planned. Think for a moment. Which should be the most important part of a story or a play? The beginning or the ending? If it is the early part, why should any one read on to the end or stay for the curtain to come down the last time? So in speeches the importance of topics should always increase as the speech proceeds.

This, then, is a principle of planning. Arrange your topics in an ascending order of importance. Work up to what is called the climax.

The list you made in response to direction 5 given above should now be presented to the cla.s.s and its contents discussed. What kind of material is likely to be arranged according to each of your principles? You have put down the chronological order, or the order of time, or some similar phrase. Just what do you mean by that? Do you mean, begin with the earliest material and follow in chronological order down to the latest? Could the reverse order ever be used? Can you cite some instance? Is contrast a good order to follow in planning? Cite material which could be so arranged. Would an arrangement from cause to effect be somewhat like one based on time?

Explain your answer. Under what circ.u.mstances do you think the opposite might be used--from effect to cause?

While there are almost countless methods of arrangements--for any one used in one part of a speech may be combined with any other in some different portion--the plan should always be determined by three fundamental matters; the material itself, the audience to which it is to be presented, and the effect the speaker wants to produce.

Even during this preliminary planning of the speech the author must be careful that when his arrangement is decided upon it possesses the three qualities necessary to every good composition. These three are unity, coherence, and emphasis.

Unity. Unity explains itself. A speech must be about one single thing.

A good speech produces one result. It induces action upon one single point. It allows no turning aside from its main theme. It does not stray from the straight and narrow road to pick flowers in the adjacent fields, no matter how enticing the temptation to loiter may be. In plain terms it does not admit as part of its material anything not closely and plainly connected with it. It does not step aside for everything that crops into the speaker's mind. It advances steadily, even when not rapidly. It does not "back water." It goes somewhere.

To preserve unity of impression a speaker must ruthlessly discard all material except that which is closely a.s.sociated with his central intention. He must use only that which contributes to his purpose. The same temptation to keep unrelated material--if it be good in itself--will be felt now as when the other unsuitable material was set aside.

This does not prevent variety and relief. Ill.u.s.trative and interesting minor sections may be, at times must be, introduced. But even by their vividness and attractiveness they must help the speech, not hinder it.

The decorations and ornaments must never be allowed to detract from the utility of the composition.

Unity may be damaged by admitting parts not in the direct line of the theme. It may be violated by letting minor portions become too long.

The ill.u.s.tration may grow so large by the introduction of needless details that it makes the listeners forget the point it was designed to enforce. Or it may be so far-fetched as to bear no real relation to the thread of development. Here lies the pitfall of the overworked "funny," story, introduced by "that reminds me." Too often it is not humorous enough to justify repet.i.tion; or--what is worse--it does not fit into the circ.u.mstances. Another fault of many speakers is over-elaboration of expression, not only for non-essentials, but in the important pa.s.sages as well. Involved language demands explanation.

The attempts to clear up what should have been simply said at first may lead a speaker to devote too many words to a single point.

This matter of unity must not be misunderstood as prohibiting the inclusion of more than one topic in a speech. A legislator in urging the repeal of a law might have several topics, such as how the law was pa.s.sed, its first operations, its increasing burdens upon people, the disappearance of the necessity for it, better methods of securing the same or better results, etc., yet all grouped about the motivating theme of securing the repeal of the law. To emphasize the greatness of a man's career a speaker might introduce such topics as his obscure origin, his unmarked youth, the spur that stimulated his ambition, his early reverses, provided that they contribute to the impression intended, to make vivid his real achievements.

In early attempts at delivering speeches don't be afraid to pause at certain places to consider whether what you are about to say really contributes to the unity or destroys it. Aside from helping you to think upon your feet, this mental exercise will help your speech by making you pause at times--a feature of speaking often entirely disregarded by many persons.

Coherence. The second quality a finished composition should have is coherence. If you know what _cohere_ and _cohesion_ mean (perhaps you have met these words in science study) you have the germ of the term's meaning. It means "stick-together-itive-ness." The parts of a speech should be so interrelated that every part leads up to all that follows. Likewise every part develops naturally from all that goes before, as well as what immediately precedes. There must be a continuity running straight through the material from start to finish.

Parts should be placed where they fit best. Each portion should be so placed--at least, in thought--that all before leads naturally and consistently up to it, and it carries on the thread to whatever follows. This prevents rude breaks in the development of thought.

Skilfully done, it aids the hearer to remember, because so easily did the thought in the speech move from one point to another, that he can carry the line of its progression with him long after. So the attainment of coherence in a speech contributes directly to that desired end--a deep impression.

Incoherent speeches are so mainly because of absence of plan, whether they be short or long, conversational or formal.

Emphasis. The third quality a speech should have is emphasis. Applied to a connected sequence of words this means that what is of most importance shall stand out most forcefully; that what is not so important shall show its subordinate relation by its position, its connection with what goes before and after; that what is least important shall receive no emphasis beyond its just due. Such manipulation requires planning and rearranging, careful weighing of the relative importance of all portions. Recall what was said of the place of the most important part.

Throughout the speech there must also be variety of emphasis. It would not be fitting to have everything with a forceful emphasis upon it. To secure variation in emphasis you must remember that in speeches the best effects will be made upon audiences by offering them slight relief from too close attention or too impressive effects. If you observe the plans finally followed by good speakers you will be able to see that they have obeyed this suggestion. They have the power to do what is described as "swaying the audience." In its simplest form this depends upon varying the emphasis.

In making an appeal for funds for dest.i.tute portions of Europe a telling topic would surely be the sufferings of the needy. Would it be wise to dwell upon such horrors only? Would a humorous anecdote of the happy grat.i.tude of a child for a cast-off toy be good to produce emphasis? Which would make the most emphatic ending--the absolute dest.i.tution, the amount to be supplied, the relief afforded, or the happiness to donors for sharing in such a worthy charity? You can see how a mere mental planning, or a shuffling of notes, or a temporary numbering of topics will help in clearing up this problem of how to secure proper and effective emphasis.

Making the First Plan. It would be a helpful thing at this point in the planning to make a pencil list of the topics to be included. This is not a final outline but a mere series of jottings to be changed, discarded, and replaced as the author considers his material and his speech. It is hardly more than an informal list, a sc.r.a.p of paper. In working with it, don't be too careful of appearances. Erase, cross out, interline, write in margins, draw lines and arrows to carry portions from one place to another, crowd in at one place, remove from another, cut the paper sheets, paste in new parts, or pin slips together. Manipulate your material. Mold it to suit your purposes.

Make it follow your plan. By this you will secure a good plan. If this seems a great deal to do, compare it with the time and energy required to learn how to swim, how to play a musical instrument, how to "shoot" in basketball, how to act a part in a play.

Knowing how to speak well is worth the effort. Every time you plan a speech these steps will merge into a continuous process while you are gathering the material. In informal discussion upon topics you are familiar with, you will become able to arrange a plan while you are rising to your feet.

Transitions. As this preliminary plan takes its form under your careful consideration of the material you will decide that there are places between topics or sections which will require bridging over in order to attain coherence and emphasis. These places of division should be filled by transitions. A transition is a pa.s.sage which carries over the meaning from what precedes to what follows. It serves as a connecting link. It prevents the material from falling apart. It preserves the continuity of ideas. A transition may be as short as a single word, such as _however_, _consequently_, _nevertheless_. It may be a sentence. It may grow into a paragraph.

The purpose of transitions--to link parts together--may induce beginners to consider them as of little importance since they manifestly add no new ideas to the theme. This opinion is entirely erroneous. Even in material for reading, transitions are necessary. In material to be received through the ear they are the most valuable helps that can be supplied to have the listener follow the development. They mark the divisions for him. They show that a certain section is completed and a new one is about to begin. They show the relation in meaning of two portions.