The ancient orators had the advantage of a captive audience, no commercial interruptions, and not being on an online platform that treated them like crap. So they had a forum to fine-tune the way they talked and addressed others which is barely possible today, save for perhaps those offered to public figures like the President of the United States (in the hands of skilled orators like Lincoln, FDR and Obama, rather than the more incompetent ones).
Audiences of feature films and television typically don't like being lectured to for minutes at a time (which is the sole of oratory), and the one-liner (one of the basic forms of comedy) often can fill the function more concisely and save everyone some time. So sometimes Cicero doesn't really have a shot, whereas Bob Hope can get people to stand up and take notice with a few, well-chosen words.
But those are the extreme examples of expertise- not everyone can pull it off, but no one wants to tell the makers of the MCU that their work sucks...
All very good points, I guess I’m weird in that I find long winded speeches captivating and one liners boring. I think though I’m weird and that you might be right, about how skilled those three men are some of the best orators in American history.
I need to consider your wise words mon ami, as many don’t have the attention span in this part of the world for speeches.
Even though I disagree about Joss Whedon (seriously, there’s some really great dialogue in Firefly, including a couple of fantastic “last stand” and “do the right thing” kind of speeches you speak of here), I too tire of the one-liners.
But it isn’t just about what is being said, it’s also in how it’s delivered. My choir teacher long ago said it isn’t enough to just sing the words to a song. You need to feel it. You need to feel every word and sing as though you believe it. Same goes for any speech. You need to believe (or your character) what you are saying.
I've been told subtext is the key to great dialouge, and being opaque etc. For example, Alfreds speech was no subtext, and very direct stating exactly what he said in clear terms. But this is only partially true. It's another tool in the toolbox. The speeches above there is often directness, but it's an almost grounding quality that anchors the subtext, meaphor, allusions and threats.
The solid and ephemeral work together like a fairy's glamours to bewitch the listener. But it's not craft.
You credit passion, but I'd say intuition. The emotional is a direct path to the intuitive but the problem is summoning the proper emotion at the right time.
I feel your essay, and the even more excellent emotional rollercoaster of the speeches, has dislodged a thought in my head. I'm going to have to listen to the knocking for a while.
Anytime and intuition is definitely a major part there, as are all the details you referred to I have now much to ponder. You made some great points. Thanks for the excellent comment Rob.
This is a very good piece but you may be comparing two separate genres: comedy and drama. I think one liner's are great and the MCU actually has several memorable one liners like Loki's "I AM A GOD!" and Hulk smashes him and says, "Puny god."
In other words, I feel like this article is looking at comedy and feeling disappointed it's not drama. The MCU is not a serious, dramatic group of movies. They fall under action-comedy in my opinion. I'd agree that drama has died in modern times (which may be what this article is actually trying to state,) but singling out the one-liner misses the point I think.
One-liners are a poison for our Civilizations, and while there is a difference between Comedy & Drama, we should restore intelligence to the former and dignity to the latter is my principal point.
An interesting piece about writing speeches and dialogue with examples. I like that you drew also from the Bible. My favorites are the Psalms for an example of experiencing difficulty and coping. In a class on speech, for the beginning of my college degree, I read Abraham Lincoln's speeches and then commented on those and I remember being awed by his speaking ability.
It’s nice to see all the thought and research and comps you put into practicing great oration :) Also, appreciate the tip of absolutely falling in genuine love with your characters and work.
Bienvenue, mon plaisir, I must admit that I love oratory and speeches so that they just make me fall all the harder for characters and stories when I see them in stories.
I’m French but love Shakespeare, though what saddens me is he would have despised me had he met me, as he hated the French and despised the greatest of all the Saints after the Apostles; Jehanne D’Arc.
But the Troy clip I considered using was the lions speech. I may have to analyze the whole of the movie Troy and the Iliad as Maryh has done but this time from the perspective of what makes them positive male or female figures.
Kenneth Brannagh’s investment in the role and portrayal is the best of those who have played Henry V over in Hollywood, just as Christian Bale’s Hamlett or Amled is the best.
All fantastic points with so much food for thought. One point I would contend is that translations of historical speeches and texts tend to be beautified by translators to appeal to readers (I saw this in real time during the last election where a certain candidate’s ramblings were made to sound coherent and rational), and in doing so lose the connection with the listener that makes the rhetoric effective. Speaking to people’s souls requires triggering a response in the simpler parts of the brain, which understand emotion better than logic. And thence lies the power of the memorable phrase that can be repeated.
Awesome and inspiring piece! My challenge as a writer is to adapt rhetoric to period as well as personality and culture. While the political upheavals of the 1930s made for some curious oratory (e.g. Hitler), how would it affect the parlance of ordinary folk?
Very good point, I myself have begun reading and listening to Hitler’s speeches along with Charles DeGaullle (they stood on opposite sides of the two WW) and their styles are very different yet they’re very fascinating in their rhetorical skills. Hitler may not be well liked by many, but his skill as an orator is undeniable.
I myself though find the Romans more interesting, I like looking also at French orators in history more than German ones if I may be so blunt. I only look at Hitler, Bismarck and Wilhelm to get me out of my shell so to speak (from an oratory perspective).
How might speeches like this affect the parlance of the ordinary folks? You must remember that people are strongly affected by romance and powerful words so that they’ll imitate and incorporate the great speeches they hear currently being spoken.
In to-day’s world there’s not many great orators, the best ones might just be Abe Shinzo & Eric Zemmour (I don’t like the latter all that much anymore, but I do like his speeches). I’ve noticed a slight tendency to affectate their patterns of speech and rhetoric in my own techniques, and also a tendency to copy Cicero’s out of fondness for him.
And ouais there’s lots of possibilities here once one learns to master speeches.
The ancient orators had the advantage of a captive audience, no commercial interruptions, and not being on an online platform that treated them like crap. So they had a forum to fine-tune the way they talked and addressed others which is barely possible today, save for perhaps those offered to public figures like the President of the United States (in the hands of skilled orators like Lincoln, FDR and Obama, rather than the more incompetent ones).
Audiences of feature films and television typically don't like being lectured to for minutes at a time (which is the sole of oratory), and the one-liner (one of the basic forms of comedy) often can fill the function more concisely and save everyone some time. So sometimes Cicero doesn't really have a shot, whereas Bob Hope can get people to stand up and take notice with a few, well-chosen words.
But those are the extreme examples of expertise- not everyone can pull it off, but no one wants to tell the makers of the MCU that their work sucks...
All very good points, I guess I’m weird in that I find long winded speeches captivating and one liners boring. I think though I’m weird and that you might be right, about how skilled those three men are some of the best orators in American history.
I need to consider your wise words mon ami, as many don’t have the attention span in this part of the world for speeches.
Know what else was great? King Theoden’s speech in return of the king. I still get chills. That whole trilogy was so well written
Love that one, Tolkien was a master at speech-writing.
Great piece!
Even though I disagree about Joss Whedon (seriously, there’s some really great dialogue in Firefly, including a couple of fantastic “last stand” and “do the right thing” kind of speeches you speak of here), I too tire of the one-liners.
But it isn’t just about what is being said, it’s also in how it’s delivered. My choir teacher long ago said it isn’t enough to just sing the words to a song. You need to feel it. You need to feel every word and sing as though you believe it. Same goes for any speech. You need to believe (or your character) what you are saying.
Your choir teacher sounds very wise and like he had a beautiful soul.
He really was. The majority of my favorite memories from school were spent with choir. I miss it sometimes.
I can get that, I’m glad you have that experience.
I've been told subtext is the key to great dialouge, and being opaque etc. For example, Alfreds speech was no subtext, and very direct stating exactly what he said in clear terms. But this is only partially true. It's another tool in the toolbox. The speeches above there is often directness, but it's an almost grounding quality that anchors the subtext, meaphor, allusions and threats.
The solid and ephemeral work together like a fairy's glamours to bewitch the listener. But it's not craft.
You credit passion, but I'd say intuition. The emotional is a direct path to the intuitive but the problem is summoning the proper emotion at the right time.
I feel your essay, and the even more excellent emotional rollercoaster of the speeches, has dislodged a thought in my head. I'm going to have to listen to the knocking for a while.
Thanks for this.
Anytime and intuition is definitely a major part there, as are all the details you referred to I have now much to ponder. You made some great points. Thanks for the excellent comment Rob.
This is a very good piece but you may be comparing two separate genres: comedy and drama. I think one liner's are great and the MCU actually has several memorable one liners like Loki's "I AM A GOD!" and Hulk smashes him and says, "Puny god."
In other words, I feel like this article is looking at comedy and feeling disappointed it's not drama. The MCU is not a serious, dramatic group of movies. They fall under action-comedy in my opinion. I'd agree that drama has died in modern times (which may be what this article is actually trying to state,) but singling out the one-liner misses the point I think.
One-liners are a poison for our Civilizations, and while there is a difference between Comedy & Drama, we should restore intelligence to the former and dignity to the latter is my principal point.
fair enough!
Though thanks for tackling this essay with intelligence and fairness, I appreciate the criticism.
No worries!
An interesting piece about writing speeches and dialogue with examples. I like that you drew also from the Bible. My favorites are the Psalms for an example of experiencing difficulty and coping. In a class on speech, for the beginning of my college degree, I read Abraham Lincoln's speeches and then commented on those and I remember being awed by his speaking ability.
I’m glad you liked the essay, I like the stories of Joseph, David, Jesus & St-Paul and never much liked the Psalms oddly enough.
It’s nice to see all the thought and research and comps you put into practicing great oration :) Also, appreciate the tip of absolutely falling in genuine love with your characters and work.
Bienvenue, mon plaisir, I must admit that I love oratory and speeches so that they just make me fall all the harder for characters and stories when I see them in stories.
You beat me to it. I was going to use Kenneth Branah's St.Crispin's Day speech from Henry V as to how great a speech it was.
Shakespeare was a genius when it came to speeches. His characters were loaded.
The clip from Troy was just as good.
I could almost recite the St.Crispin's day speech from memory.
We few, We happy Few. We band of brothers.
But I leave you with this one: From Hamlet -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjuZq-8PUw0
I’m French but love Shakespeare, though what saddens me is he would have despised me had he met me, as he hated the French and despised the greatest of all the Saints after the Apostles; Jehanne D’Arc.
But the Troy clip I considered using was the lions speech. I may have to analyze the whole of the movie Troy and the Iliad as Maryh has done but this time from the perspective of what makes them positive male or female figures.
Kenneth Brannagh’s investment in the role and portrayal is the best of those who have played Henry V over in Hollywood, just as Christian Bale’s Hamlett or Amled is the best.
All fantastic points with so much food for thought. One point I would contend is that translations of historical speeches and texts tend to be beautified by translators to appeal to readers (I saw this in real time during the last election where a certain candidate’s ramblings were made to sound coherent and rational), and in doing so lose the connection with the listener that makes the rhetoric effective. Speaking to people’s souls requires triggering a response in the simpler parts of the brain, which understand emotion better than logic. And thence lies the power of the memorable phrase that can be repeated.
Ohh good point, hadn’t thought of that. Good point about translations.
Awesome and inspiring piece! My challenge as a writer is to adapt rhetoric to period as well as personality and culture. While the political upheavals of the 1930s made for some curious oratory (e.g. Hitler), how would it affect the parlance of ordinary folk?
A lot of stuff for literary growth here.
Very good point, I myself have begun reading and listening to Hitler’s speeches along with Charles DeGaullle (they stood on opposite sides of the two WW) and their styles are very different yet they’re very fascinating in their rhetorical skills. Hitler may not be well liked by many, but his skill as an orator is undeniable.
I myself though find the Romans more interesting, I like looking also at French orators in history more than German ones if I may be so blunt. I only look at Hitler, Bismarck and Wilhelm to get me out of my shell so to speak (from an oratory perspective).
How might speeches like this affect the parlance of the ordinary folks? You must remember that people are strongly affected by romance and powerful words so that they’ll imitate and incorporate the great speeches they hear currently being spoken.
In to-day’s world there’s not many great orators, the best ones might just be Abe Shinzo & Eric Zemmour (I don’t like the latter all that much anymore, but I do like his speeches). I’ve noticed a slight tendency to affectate their patterns of speech and rhetoric in my own techniques, and also a tendency to copy Cicero’s out of fondness for him.
And ouais there’s lots of possibilities here once one learns to master speeches.