Much continues to be written about the uses and abuses of the art of speech. It may not be amiss, therefore, to review some basic concepts in the search for those characteristics that go to make up "a good man speaking." Whether or not one believes that the articulate use of his mother tongue is a God-given ability, it is undeniable that the enhancement of the art of speaking is inspiring. Presumably, advice and training dispensed by speech teachers are needed, either because inherent abilities in potential speakers must be uncovered or because a struggling generation needs help to properly express itself. Whatever the reason for the existence of speech teaching and training per se, certainly there must exist some fundamentals from which a philosophy of speech derives.
Primarily, speakers need to educate themselves to speak according to physical law. The erect stance, with proper utterance of words obtained by attention to correct breathing habits, go a long way toward building a solid discipline for clear and distinct articulation. A misuse of the basic laws of physiology in the area of speech may either establish a desultory regimen of communication on the one hand, or a perversion of zeal by undue frenzy and overgesturing on the other hand. The voice is a powerful factor, and may be employed equally for good or bad. Unless speakers today can garb their knowledge in appropriate language and accompany it with the benefits derived from properly understood and executed physical laws, education or erudition may prove of little or no value.
The present inclination to marry the impartation of knowledge to a sharpness and harshness of speech so often redolent of near-frustration, is proving detrimental to the techniques of a well-rounded speech pattern. Speech uttered in a voice powerfully influenced by the hard rasping tone of life in a twentieth-century world may ultimately divorce friends and alienate audiences.
Never before has the impact of modernity underscored the need for a striving for perfection in speech. In a time when complexity is prevalent, a speaker in public or in private needs to understand that the greater his simplicity, the better will his words be comprehended. Long ago, the Holy Scriptures pinpointed this principle when they recorded concerning some ancient scribes: "They read . . . distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading" (Neh. 8:8). Lack of understanding may too often be caused by an all-too-frequent inability to communicate.
If today's "orator" is to continue to be "a good man speaking," must he not become accustomed to speaking in pleasant tones, using the purest, kindest, and most courteous language he possesses? This is not an argument for the cultivation of that wily counterpart of smooth talking embraced in demagoguery and haranguing, but is a plea for those kindly words that may become as dew and gentle rain in a parched and thirsty auditory.
It has been rightly observed that the best school for the type of culture irradiated by kindliness and courtesy in speech is the home. Undermined as many homes are by today's running to and fro, additional responsibilities devolve upon the school. Here a challenge is given to speech teachers to have at their command such soundness of speech that drabness and condemnation do not curtail their efforts.
Among the basics of the educational process, training of the nobler mental powers for use in worth-while endeavors should engross the teacher of speech. The crying need for the exemplification of integrity of character by the one accomplished in the arts of speech lies over against the perversion of mental faculties too often demonstrated by the platform entrepreneur. Certainly it would be well if all uncomely gestures and uncouth speech could be discarded, and the speaker of today become a painstaking representative of truth.
Those who teach speech recognize the plethora of incorrect use of the English language. The youth of today are surrounded by direful influences so far as pure speech is concerned—the juke box, cheap pulp fabrications, sentimental song crooners, et cetera. They are saddled with unskilled and incorrect usage of speech communication, which all too frequently are supported by the tenuous strands of semanticism. Emphasis needs to be given in such a way that the common people will hear a speaker gladly. Such comprehension will attract audiences, who generally come unequipped with either dictionary or thesaurus.
Added to clarity of utterance and the ability to communicate truth should be the use of self-evident illustrations. One may beat his head ever so long on the cobblestones of ambiguity, but his dedication will be of no avail unless he is able to fasten his information securely in the minds of his hearers. Profundity is often lost in a maze of intricate dialectics. The windows of a house are to let in light as well as to groom the facade of the dwelling. It would be well to speak of things that are real and not of real things as though they were imaginary. The example of the Master Speaker of all time is worthy of notice. Jesus Christ took as His illustrations the simplicities of life, infusing into them such depth of meaning that ever afterward His illustrations repeated His lessons.
There is a difference between earnestness and vehemence. The first endeavors to unleash men's minds from absorption in the trivial; the latter blows hard in the face of reality and is superficial, for it lacks enduring quality. Earnestness does not stoop to flattery. It distinguishes between commendation and flattery. "A good man speaking" does not praise an audience for their cleverness, but rather stimulates them with the earnestness of his challenges.
Can it be that the accomplished speaker today, living in turbulent times, possesses that serenity of inner being that multiplies through his hearers an atmosphere of peace? Why need it be that the secular speaker of today shall tend to relegate these attributes to the sovereignty of the ministry? Why cannot those who listen be revitalized by anyone who deigns to utter the pleasant sounds of speech? The electric response to goodness should be coveted by all who train to speak well.
To be able to convey one's message so succintly, yet so forcefully, so that no lengthy discourse shall counteract one's efficiency, must again re-emphasize the necessity for the ,short speech. Men's minds often fail to absorb essentials because there is such a mass of matter given them that mental indigestion results. Rapidity of progress from point to point in a speech is no sign of intelligence. One who fulfills a definite purpose in speaking will make his lessons short and to the point.
One may be led to think that the timeless expression of an "orator being a good man speaking" is merely a polite aphorism; but one of the most convincing arguments of any speech is the speaker's consistent life. To urge those who listen to do only what they are told, despite adverse demonstration, is folly. An integral element of persuasion is sincerity—not only of utterance but of the speaker's life. Whether this be ultraidealistic or not, modern training of those who shall speak must include such a platform pattern. Of what value is the music if the words do not ring true?
The business of public speaking demands dedicated intellects and lives. If those who speak could so govern their own lives that they would refuse to indulge in anything, however laudable it might seem, which an enlightened conscience would tell them would abate their influence one iota, what a powerful influence speakers and speaking would have upon a listening public! This is true eloquence. Glib tongues are not sufficient in this space age. Speakers must drop that notion. Silver-tongued orators have always been rare, but men of intense purpose and motivated activity can still be made available for the public platform today.
