High School Public Speaking Memory, Today's Early Morning Plans

 I remember, looking back on my high school times at Nova, how one of my female blonde classmates one day suddenly "saw the light" and underwent a speedy transformation into a glib, smooth public speaker.  She even got on the closed circuit school television and delivered a five-minute monologue to the school about how good and easy public speaking was, and that folks like little-old "almost subhuman" me had no excuses for not dazzling the world with my oratory skills.  A little later on ,we were introduced by a mutual friend, on whom she definitely had her eyes set.  I smiled and tried to look and sound nice, but she only came across as a rejecting snob who was fending me off...not that I was even remotely interested in her on the slightest level.  I could have tactfully (or brutally) put her in her proper place by interjecting that good speaking is only part of the equation, and that good listening skills are at least equally as important as well .  You can either esteem (or insult) your counterpart based on your attitude toward them as people, hopefully encouraging them in the process. That one speech I heard was special in one way: afterwards, and I could have brought this up to her, I couldn't think of a single section within the presentation that was of any use.  Oh well, I dealt with the snub in a dignified manner by henceforth avoiding her like the plague...I could see that she was grooming herself to be a finger-pointer later in life...probably launched into tr  ashing me soon after our greeting. So I arose at 3:30, brewed coffee, ran in place, and wrote this article. It's now a little past 5 and the day (March 8) lies ahead (we 'lept' ahead into Daylight Savings Time).  I'm still frustrated by my lack of endurance when it comes to going on modest walks. I want to continue hearing and implementing Jim Rohn YouTube podcasts, read a flawed fantasy novel by Josh Khan and study foreign languages.  And, now that I have that connecting cord, do some journal writing on my wonderful oldAlpha Smart processor before I nod off into an afternoon nap..

Quote of the Week...from Mark Twain

It usually takes me more than three weeks to prepare a good impromptu speech.     ---Mark Twain

For me the king of monologues has to be the late Jean Shepherd, author and narrator of the famous television movie A Christmas Story and a legend on New York's talk radio station WOR for his show that lasted for decades in the last century.  From 1974 to 1976 I would avidly listen to rebroadcasts on my local Miami station WKAT/1360 and marvel at Jean's ability to maintain an ongoing monologue for around a half hour.  Of course, even back then (I was 18-20 years old) I knew that he would most probably enter the studio with at least a rough outline as to what he would sit there and discuss (with himself) for any set program.  But it's also obvious that he was speaking very conversationally and was spontaneous, not reading something straight from a prompt as so many politicians and media jocks do today.  Being someone interested in beginning a podcast, I'd like to emulate Jean Shepherd's style...and that's where Mark Twain's above quote kicks in.  I don't know whether the famed author was referring to writing a detailed outline or a script to be memorized, but it seems that regardless, it seems that some kind of preparation is in order before a final podcast monologue can be recorded.  Right now, I'm just practicing (without recording) listening to myself (try to) tackle various preset topics verbally in my car to establish the skill of maintaining a smooth, viable narrative.  But after seeing on YouTube how much podcasters edit their product, a lot of that smoothness you hear and see is often artificially produced in hindsight, after the initial recording.  Well, recording artists remix and mess with their music as well, and few complain about the final polished product.  I imagine my own final product, which I want to sound impromptu, will also...as with Twain...demand some foresight and organization requiring extra time and effort... 

My Progress So Far on Budding Podcasting Efforts

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about considering starting my own podcast, with the same basic goal as my writing except that it would be speaking instead.  Again, I want to instill a regular, disciplined habit of publicly available expression, this time making it verbal.  I mentioned that preliminary to starting an actual podcast I would make unrecorded monologues about preset topics during my drives to and from work.  Well, that was an eye opener for me, with me stumbling about tongue-tied for the most part, more a stream of disconnected consciousness coming from my mouth than a coherent narrative...is that really how I think? I do think I've improved a bit, and I've decided to alter the strategy with my "carcasts", as I call them, to do a "rough draft monologue" on the drive to work, let the results simmer in my mind for a few hours, and then on the drive home revisit the topic, hopefully in a more structured and comprehendible (to others) way.  I get that most of your regular podcasters develop outlines, some detailed, beforehand of what they will discuss om a podcast.  I'm not yet at that point, preferring right now to make the experience more extemporaneous.  Yesterday, for example, I set out to discuss the University of Florida campus as I remember it and as it is today.  During the first monologue I felt I was awkwardly groping about to find something to say while in the second, I felt more organized and with more knowledge at quick recall.  Now let's see what my carcast topic for today will be... 

Just Finished Reading Watership Down by Richard Adams

For a long time I had heard of Watership Down, a 1972 children's story by Richard Adams about a group of rabbits in rural England looking for a homeland...but it wasn't until last week that I managed to check out a copy from my local public library. I also remember that they made it into an animated movie a few years later but never saw it, either.  Well, after just finishing the book, I was suitably impressed...

Wild rabbits are social creatures, forming societies called warrens.  The characters in Watership Down (a "down" is a hill...there is actually a place called Watership Down in Hampshire) speak a language called "lapine" and organize their society like humans.  Adams originally conceived of Watership Down as a story he told his two young daughters during a long trip.  After their prodding, he wrote it as a book and sought the input of an expert on rabbits as to how they behaved in the wild...the result was an interesting composite of rabbit and humanity.   Hazel and Fiver are two ordinary rabbits living in a warren when the latter, a small rabbit with the gift of intuition, one day suddenly implores the others to quickly leave the warren to avoid destruction.  The warren's leader rejects Fiver's plea, and he, along with Hazel and a few others, manage to escape from the other rabbits.  It is their quest for a new home and the adventures, new friends...as well as foes...that they experience along the way that comprise this compelling tale, along with their folklore exemplified by stories told about their mythical spiritual leader El-ahrairah...

There is a temptation, when reading Watership Down, to draw analogies from it with human society and history...I saw a couple: Britain and America with their traditions of freedom standing up to the militarist dictatorships in World War II, as well as a disparaging look at socialist societies.  But the author denied any attempt at analogy...he was simply telling a story.  And I believe him, although a good writer will often unconsciously reveal much of his or her beliefs through the characters and their behavior.  If you haven't yet read Watership Down, I urge you to do so.  On one level, it's a story for kids about rabbits.  But on another, the text is written in a language for more mature readers.  Makes me want to read some of Adams' other stories.  By the way, Richard Adams passed away very recently...in December 2016...at the age of 96...

Melania Trump and Her Convention Speech

In her address in front of yesterday's Republican Convention in Cleveland, Donald Trump's wife Melania, a Slovenian immigrant who still expresses herself tentatively in her adopted English language, delivered a speech after being introduced onstage by her husband.  By all accounts, Melania is very likeable and presents the kind of charm that Jackie Kennedy added to JFK's presidential candidacy in 1960.  Mrs. Trump, however, possesses very little of the verbal eloquence that Jackie had...but no one really expected her to, did they?  Melania obviously did not write the speech she delivered, although she most probably did sit down with the actual writer and laid out some of the points she wanted to make.  It's also obvious to me that she was very uncomfortable being onstage giving that speech...essentially before the world...and that she nonetheless performed her role admirably.  Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for Melania's speechwriter, who lifted almost verbatim entire passages of a speech that Michelle Obama (you know, Trump's "enemy" Barack's wife) gave eight years earlier at the Democratic Convention.  Of course, the next morning  Donald Trump's campaign chairman Paul Manafort called the plagiarism allegations "absurd"...what's absurd is that anyone should ever believe what this spin artist says about anything hereafter...

No reasonable person should believe that Melania Trump would herself write such a speech, copying text from a so-prominent address from the recent past.  My opinion of her as a supportive spouse to a very ambitious...even ruthless...individual hasn't changed: I wish she were a little more strong-willed about asserting her own opinions...but then again, maybe if that were that the case, the Republican Party's role model for what they consider to be presidential material probably would never have married her in the first place.  That doesn't mean that I think poorly of Melania...if anything, her gracious nature is in stark contrast to her rude and mean-spirited husband...

President Obama Gives State of the Union Speech

Yesterday President Obama laid out his vision for the rest of his term in office in his State of the Union address, given before a joint session of Congress.  I did not watch it, but caught most of it from the radio. It was a good speech, as this president is so adept at when presenting prepared material to a group.  Although the President covered many topics, his salient points, as I saw it, were (1) the economic recovery is going full swing, but that it is important that the middle class and poor be able to enjoy the benefits as well as the rich (meaning raise taxes on the higher-income brackets), (2) our foreign policy should be carefully crafted so that we explore and implement a variety of approaches when dealing with our enemies abroad...so that we don't allow ourselves to get mired down in wars, and (3) we should invest in education and infrastructure to keep America at the forefront of the world.  With regard to the last point, he alluded to his recent proposal of granting free community college education (I wonder if that includes soon-to-be old-timers like me who want to do something new as retirement approaches...no, I'm probably excluded) as well as diminishing the significance of the important Keystone XL Pipeline issue now before Congress by stating that the various needed infrastructure construction and repair projects for the country would generate thirty times more jobs than "one pipeline".  And he pushed all of the required liberal social issue buttons, including more than once supporting gay rights and same-sex marriage (which he opposed back in 2008 when that stance was more politically feasible for him).

I don't have a problem with a lot of President Obama's speech, but I do have a major one with this tendency of him to smugly dismiss issues that others consider to be important.  For example, in 2009, after single-handedly forcing NASA to abandon its worthy and ambitious project to establish a base on the moon (after he had promised during the 2008 campaign not to do this), he brushed away any criticism with the flippant comment "We've already been there".  That offended me somehow.  Now it's just this "one pipeline"... just a drop in the bucket, right?  But it is the number one item for consideration for the new Republican congressional majority in both houses and, regardless whether you're for or against the pipeline (I happen to be for it), his casual brushoff of the issue does not bode well for his relationship with either the Senate or the House in the next two years.  No, sadly, I see this speech, which might have been more constructive and conciliatory, to have been little more than oratorical posturing for the primary purpose of shoring up the Democratic Party base for the next election, in other words, the same old "stuff".  Perhaps the saddest thing of all, though, is that regarding this president, whom I have supported through two elections (though not wholeheartedly in the last one), he would still get my vote were he eligible to run again as I look at the sorry list of Republicans (especially Mr. Romney, the perennial candidate) who currently have their power-hungry eyes fixed on his job...

Let's Give Sarah a Hand

Sarah Palin, with whom I have a myriad of differences, was caught recently using her hand during a speech to the wacko Tea Party convention. As she was ridiculing President Obama for using a teleprompter during his speeches, Palin herself kept looking down at her left hand, the palm thereof in particular. When cameras zoomed in on what she was looking at, they revealed notes on what to say during the speech. And then the comedy shows had a field day, with Jay Leno, Stephen Colbert, and Jon Stewart headlining the star-studded list of Palin mockers. Even Obama's press secretary Robert Gibbs brought out his own left hand in a press meeting to reveal what he thought were humorous (but by then extremely stale) messages on it.

I had my own laugh at ol' Sarah, who is actually relatively young from my viewpoint but whose public "stage" act grew old and withered long, long ago. But now it's time to defend the quitter ex-governor and political opportunist (gosh, this is going to be harder than I thought).

First, I wish Sarah Palin success within the Republican Party, especially regarding her all-too-inevitable campaign for the 2012 nomination. For a Palin nomination would pretty much ensure Obama's reelection (assuming our current president doesn't just say "to hell with this [expletive] job" by then). As for her "hand", I scribble stuff on mine from time to time as well to remind me of things. But I don't then get up on stage somewhere and deride another for more opaquely using speech "aids". Still, Palin has this comedic, naïve, and almost endearing aspect to her personality that I can relate to. It reminds me of Jackie Gleason's Sheriff Buford T. Justice character in the movie Smokey and the Bandit when he confidently struts out of a restroom...trailing a roll of toilet paper behind him.

I know how Sarah Palin can improve her image although I wonder whether she is capable of grasping it. And it's simple: when criticizing someone like Obama, stop casting aspersions on everything he does or says, instead sprinkling as many sincere-sounding compliments as you can in with your focused criticisms. Tempered criticism can cut like a knife if done correctly, although I have witnessed few who are really adept at it. But if ex-governor Palin would just pause a little and observe the current president instead of only deriding him, she just might find someone with this skill to emulate (with a conservative face, of course). A skill which, in my opinion, Barack Obama rode all the way into the White House. Hint, hint, Sarah.

Let the Speaker Speak

One of the blogs that I have discovered lately is by Marcus A. Smith. Smith presents some very helpful insights about public speaking, one among them being that you don’t have to be standing up behind a podium addressing a crowd in a formal setting to be engaged in public speaking. Instead, it may be more beneficial to picture any opportunity for verbally expressing yourself to others as public speaking. To a great extent, I see some value in looking at public speaking this way. But there is an important caveat.

If I am “given the podium”, that means that I have the authority to make a reasonably uninterrupted presentation to others. When in other more informal settings, I rarely have this opportunity. Everyone seems to want to get their two cents worth in, and I can almost never get anyone outside my family to show the common civilized courtesy to hear my thoughts out until I’m finished expressing them (although these people do exist in small numbers).

Part of this rudeness on the part of “listeners” may be due to the shrinking attention span and increasing impatience on the part of people in general (as I perceive it). Another reason may be that people tune in to television and radio and pattern their listening behavior on talk show hosts who shamelessly interrupt their guests in mid-sentence to make their own (usually topic-changing) points. The worst offenders, as I see them, are CNN’s Wolf Blitzer and Fox’s Sean Hannity. But they’re just the worst of the bad. The commonly-seen rapid-fire format where a host shoots off questions to one of two or three guests (set off to the side of the screen in little boxes) may pander to people who are incapable of concentrating on anything for a sustained period of time, but they almost never produce anything resembling a resolution to the topic being discussed.

For a refreshing departure from this frustrating type of media experience, I highly recommend C-Span’s Book TV feature, which “spans” each weekend. I have learned more about just any topic imaginable than I’ve picked up on any other station, just from listening to speakers who were accorded a decent amount of time to speak on their topics of expertise and/or interest. There is almost always an orderly period for questions from the audience at the end.

Why can’t the networks run their shows like this? Well, I already know one of the answers. People at-large want somebody spoon-feeding them their opinions, and in small, tasty bites. Focusing on any one topic long enough for them to develop their own personal opinions would be too much of a drag!