h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Public speaking - A835607
Author: Samarpita - U199500

Public speaking is a form of art, the groundwork for which was laid over 2300 years ago. Public presentations maybe some balance of the three proofs: ethos (ethical), pathos (emotional), and logos (logical). The ethos is the speaker and his or her character as revealed through the communication. The pathos is the audience and the emotions felt by them during the rhetoric. The logos is the speaker's logical appeals. A rhetorician may identify with the audience and their perception as an important part of public speaking. In fact a speech maybe effective only if it stirs up emotions in its audience.

A mesmerizing performance by a speaker may result if the speaker were to break into uncontrollable giggles, with the result that he may proceed to complete the entire speech in a constant state of high rapture. It may leave the audience completely befuddled as to what is going on and as the speaker tries to control himself, he may only manage to stumble off the stage muttering incoherently.

A much more successful technique could be to fix the audience with a glassy stare and to ignore them completely and to proceed through the speech with the unrelenting ardor of a army general, proceeding through enemy lines, giving no quarter, no matter what, mowing down resistance.

A third, highly successful technique, which could be used when avoiding unfavorable questions, is to close your eyes, in effect to signal to the audience to do the same, and then to pause for infinite lengths of time between each syllable until everyone has forgotten what the question was.

However there are essentially two parts to making speeches in public, the content and the delivery of the speech. The following methodology may be adopted to enable one to shine in the face of all impending speech making debacles.

Public speech is an outcome of reason. In this context it may be construed as a causal force, or as a quality of human mental well being. Both being instrumental as well as necessary, towards effecting a positive outcome to the whole episode.

Several reasons for public speaking maybe:
1. Demonstrative: observance of social occasions e.g., weddings, funerals.
2. Persuasive: effecting business outcomes e.g., presentations.
3. Deliberative: effecting judicial and administrative outcomes e.g., lawsuits, legislation.

At this point writing aids maybe used to note down the salient points, which will form the essence of the speech. As the occasion looms ahead of us it is necessary to appear at ones best. One can do so by being organized, by proceeding in a knowledgeable manner on the topic at hand, and thereby impressing everyone as to the deep grasp one has of the subject matter. This knowledge can be acquired by determinedly perusing a large number of documentation in existence on the relevant subject matter.

The message could be short, simple and convincing. This could essentially consist of the introduction, where the objective of the speech could be out lined and these could be elucidated in the main body of the speech. A summary and conclusion could effectively outline the outcome, if any, the speaker could be attempting to achieve from the audience.

A strong opening maybe necessary to obtain the audiences attention, however, this may rebound if the audience were unable to establish the relevance of the opening message. This maybe avoided if one has a good knowledge of the audience, which can be ascertained by gauging their reactions to questions pertaining to the message being delivered. However this may not be feasible. Hence it may be better to make a strong ending. However any facts, which may enhance or establish credibility maybe included at the beginning as it may predispose the audience to be more attentive.

The next step is to develop ones communication abilities. The qualities necessary to be an effective speaker are:

1. The ability to speak
2. The ability to speak coherently
3. The ability to speak coherently at very high decibels

It is necessary to bring the speech to it reasonable and logical conclusion by delivering it in a clear, articulate manner. The occasion may call upon one to speak in a pitch of voice one may normally reserve for other drivers on the road at rush hour. Hence it is necessary to practice speaking at the appropriate decibel levels in advance until the neighbors call the law enforcement agencies.

A speaker's physical attributes may cause some amount of distraction and maybe an impediment to delivering the message clearly. These maybe overcome by curtailing physical motions to a minimum and instead attempting to focus the audience attention by the modulation of voice, by raising it, lowering it, by well-timed pauses, to highlight the importance of relevant points.

The best methodology for the speaker would perhaps be to brainstorm, research, strategize and rehearse, to demonstrate high levels of enthusiasm, along with a short clear message.

The last step is to check the venue in advance, for bugs, seriously the loud speakers may not be working properly. Last minute preparations could include going to the theatre, attempting to transfer the speech to unsuspecting friends, and, or, fleeing the country. After making the speech many speakers feel an intense feeling of relief, it is like having survived the Titanic.

Hi again.

Two things:

1 - You definetly DON'T have to post the entire Entry to PR. You even shouldn't, IMO.

2 - This Entry is really looking a LOT better than the previous attempts. Congratulations. Seems we're going to have an Edited Entry quite soon.

Apart from that, I think you could double check the commas, I think there are some places where there are too many, like:

"[...]check the venue in advance, for bugs, seriously the loud speakers[...]"

Contents is pretty good IMO.

HELL

Public Speaking ! Its really an Art of Arts.


ACI

A.R.Shams's "Creative Living Spirit"

OOps I did it again. Sorry!!!.. Please bear with my misplaced attempts at deleting/updating/modifying threads...its all getting very confusing...Thanks for saying that... actually many of the thots in the entry are from Zarq..who had asked for a collaborative entry.. er.. how do I acknowledge him? I will check the commas. What is IMO?

Thanks a lot...Samarpita

OOps I did it again. Sorry!!!.. Please bear with my misplaced attempts at deleting/updating/modifying threads...its all getting very confusing...Thanks for saying that... actually many of the thots in the entry are from Zarq..who had asked for a collaborative entry.. er.. how do I acknowledge him? I will check the commas. What is IMO? yes definitely its an art of arts....

Thanks a lot...Samarpita

Well I don't know about anyone else, but I find this entry very confusing.

It seems to be a mixture of straight talking and tongue-in-cheek funny stuff, but it's sometimes hard to tell which is which. There's a promising opening para about classical rhetoric, but then the entry veers off in other directions.

Public speaking did not, of course, start only 2300 years ago - it's much older than that.

I can't quite envisage an audience being 'mesmerized' by a speaker who's continually corpsing.

And I think one of the important things about public speaking is that you cannot separate content and delivery. How you speak and how you deliver the speech are part of what you are saying. Public speaking is a performance art. Try delivering a really rousing speech in a boring deadpan way, and you won't do very well.

At the moment this entry seems to me to be all over the place. Sorry, but I think it needs more focus. Just my opinion of course, others may disagree.

Bels

Selected UAs (Useful abbreviations):

IMO: In My Oppinion
IMHO: In My Humble Oppinion
BTW: By the way
IIRC: If I Remember Correctly
LOL: Lots of Laughs
ROTFL: Rolling Over The Floor Laughing
FYI: For Your Information

Giving credits to other Researchers:

1. Contact the other Researcher - this is very important.
2. Edit Entry and include the researcher number in the appropriate box - AFTER you own number.

See you around,

HELL

Dear Bels,

Thank you, for your comments. They were very useful for me and I have reworked the entry accordingly. Do tell me what you think of this one.

Dear Hell,

Thanks for all your help. I think I am some what less in the dark now. I will get in touch with the researcher. Thanks again.

regards Samarpita

Hi Samarpita

This has got a lot closer to being ready for the EG now.

It could do with some sub-headers in Guide ML and there are still quite a few grammatical errors, but both of these aspects could be sorted by a sub-editor.

Some substantive points

Some explanation of where you are getting ethos/pathos/logos from would be helpful. I guess these were the terms used by the ancient greeks in describing the science of rhetoric? If so it is worth explaining as they come a bit out of the blue.

The reliance on the science of rhetoric aspects means that it has got quite theoretical. I quite like the philosophical bit at the end but I'm not sure you need the section on clarity of objective in the middle. On the philosophical point at the end, I think I would argue that if our politicians cannot express themselves clearly, how can we expect people to be able to participate in democracy?

Perhaps a bit more practical stuff could go back in?

For example, someone in one of the earlier threads mentioned the value of repetition in putting your speech across.

You might also want to mention that political speechwriters generally work to a rule of no more than three key points in any one speech - an audience won't retain anymore than that.

Also, with any speech it is important to use language and register that it is appropriate to your audience. If you're adressing the general public, cut out the jargon/technical language. On the contrary if it's a specialist audience, a few well chosen terms can help let them know that you're up to date in the field.

I think that for any type of speech it is important not to overrun the time allocated. If your audience is bored/wondering when they will get their lunch/distracted by the distress signals being put out by the moderator or chairperson then they are not giving you their full attention. You can't really overdo the importance of being concise.

A common pitfall is the use of jokes. Very difficult to get right. Almost impossible if your speech is being translated into another language.

At the end of your first para you say that a speech may only be effective if it stirs up emotion. I'm not sure if this is true for business/technical speeches - if I'm doing a review of legal cases in public procurement, for example, I don't expect much emotional engagement from the audience...

Some more specific points

I like the ethos para.
The logos para is repetitive and could be shortened.
The listing your achievements idea is not always a great idea in practice, nothing gets peoples hackles up more than 5 minutes on 'my brilliant career blah blah' Depends on the audience but at most it should just be brief, to give them an idea of why you're competent to talk on the subject.
I don't understand the para on utilitity/credibility at all and would cut it along with the clarity of objective point.

To conclude, if you go back through the various threads, pick out the practical tips suggested and add them to the theoretical points you already have, then I think this article will be close to ready.

Sprout

I agree with Sprout.

I also think that at the start you should mention different kinds of public speaking. I think it is very difficult to generalise about something so diverse, which might be a political rally or a university lecture or a social occasion or a business pitch or a training session or a personal growth workshop or...

So it might be better to pick one particular type of public speaking and concentrate on that. I think that would give the entry greater clarity and focus.

I think I'm right in saying that 'rhetoric' these days refers almost exclusively to political speechmaking, and wouldn't apply to the other kinds.

"The speaker: Is akin to a conductor conducting a symphony, orchestrating the audience, navigating them through facts and suggestions in the speech."

This is an unfortunate simile, if you don't mind my saying so. A symphony conductor neither orchestrates nor navigates the audience. A conductor's primary communication is with the orchestra, and it is nothing like public speaking IMO.

Here again, it depends on the type of speaking. A speaker may face a hostile audience, for example, and have the job of winning them over.

This entry is getting much better, but still needs a bit of work yet, I think. But it's well worth persevering with.

Bels

Dear Sprout, Bels,

Thank you for all the suggestions you made. The in-depth review was excellent. I have made the changes, though I hope its not too long. Hope it's done now!! Thanks.

Samarpita

Are we all ready to get this into the Edited Guide

Hmmm - well I don't think so - sorry Samarpita - I do appreciate the amount of work you have put into this.

Let me explain what the problem is.

On one hand you have quite a formal piece based on the ideas of Rhetoric. Then on the other hand you have 7 or 8 paras on a bloke called John and his pitch to venture capitalists. The two ideas use radically different vocabulary and really don't mesh together.

This new addition has also made it very long - if you must have John and his drums please cut him down to a couple of paragraphs and call it something like "the commercial pitch - a case study".

A more general comment is that it still lacks focus - it needs some internal structure - the rhetoric stuff provided that structure but you need to apply it all the way through.

The last paragraphs from action item to the penultimate paragraph look like they have been cut and pasted from somewhere. Not all of what is in there is relevant to public speaking - its about a pure commercial pitch. You might start with "what do you do" in a meeting but not in a public presentation surely?

You either need to break up the different types of presentation, or better still, take Bels advice and concentrate on political speaking, which is the type relative to the rhetoric bits.

It's too long for me to make any more specific comments - but much of what has been said in this and earlier threads remains relevant. If you make it shorter again I will have another detailed look.

Congratulations again on the work you have put into this

Sprout

Samarpita, it's really encouraging that you are listening to the comments here, and you're doing a great job. But once again I have to agree with Sprout. This could be a really first-class entry, but it isn't there yet.

I think the way to get there is to zoom in and focus on the essentials. Stick with it!

Bels

I agree with Bels and Sprout here, Samarpita.

Probably the example could stand on its own, however it's oddly matched here with the formal stuff. I like the idea of an example, though.

Stick with it. I would be nice to see this in the Edited Guide.

I'll shall leave this entry in PR until the final tweaks have been made.

Keep up the good work everyone

Hmmmm... Anybody know what the status on this one is? It looks *close* to being ready, but not quite. But the author will have been AWOL for 2 months as of Christmas.

Anybody in touch with the author? Or anybody interested in taking this one and making enough tweaks for it to be ready? Or do we have another one FM bound?

Mikey

Please do take it up.. I would be glad if someone would complete it.. I seem to have lost track of it.. thanks and best wishes for the new year..

Samarpita

Allright.

Good to see you're still around Samarpita

HELL

Thanks Hell.. and all the best...

Samarpita