3/5/08

Speaking Well

Sarah Schwartz


Certain terms, like beauty and honor, are subjective creations from the culture and time from which they emerge. As a result, their definitions remain transient. Poulakos (1997) presents a phrase in Speaking for the Polis that also demonstrates this deciduous quality. Eu legein is defined as “the art of speaking well” (p. 64). While “speaking” has an enduring explanation, the definition of “speaking well” proves to be elusive.

Poulakos provides us with insight into the evolution of this phrase. Eu legein, paralleled with the term eloquence, is commonly associated with aestheticism in Homeric poetry. The great speaker Nestor in The Iliad is initially described as “sweet of speech…from whose tongue flowed speech sweeter than honey” (Book 1: lines 247-250). As explained by Poulakos (1997), “Homer and the tragedians, delighted audiences by deploying mythic material and produced pleasure by appealing to the senses” (p. 76).

However, Isocrates recognized that eu legein could not be merely relegated to its aesthetic form. Instead, Isocrates maintained that “his version of rhetoric [is] eloquence and wisdom in one: “the power to speak well (legein) is taken as the surest index of a sound understanding (phronein)” (p. 71). Isocrates modified eu legein to encapsulate not only eloquence, but wisdom and, most importantly, that no disparity should exist between the two qualities.

This modification is referenced as early as Plato in Ion, “Well spoken… Socrates; but still I shall be surprised if you can speak well enough to convince me…(p. 536)”. Plato acknowledges the addition of intelligence in Isocrates’ eu legein and uses it to support argumentation. However, Isocrates’ aesthetic portion of eu legein is unreferenced. Unfortunately, this exemplifies a trend in modern scholarship and contemporary rhetoricians continue to bemoan this problem. Bradford (2002) laments, “[b]eyond unfortunate equations of rhetoric with grandiloquence, this scarcity [aesthetic capacities] in recent rhetorical scholarship corresponds to general humanistic and social scientific prejudices against the topic of style” (p. 223). In other words, Isocrates’ eu legein, became rationalized during the limbo between mythos to logos. A dilemma just as problematic as considering eu legein as eloquence without wisdom emerges: considering eu legein as wisdom without eloquence.

References

Homer. The Iliad. Retrieved February 5 2008 from http://www.perseus.tufts.edu.

Plato. Ion. Retrieved February 5 2008 from http://www.perseus.tufts.edu.

Poulakos, T. (1997). Speaking for the Polis. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.

Vivian, B. (2002). Style, rhetoric, and postmodern culture. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 35(5), 223-243.

3 comments:

Aaron Bell said...

I think that the present day preception of someone who "speaks well" has not changed according to your section:

“his version of rhetoric [is] eloquence and wisdom in one: “the power to speak well (legein) is taken as the surest index of a sound understanding (phronein)” (p. 71). Isocrates modified eu legein to encapsulate not only eloquence, but wisdom and, most importantly, that no disparity should exist between the two qualities."

I am going to disagree with Isocrates and say that wisdom and speaking well can be seperated. (Isn't he an example himself?)
Just look at the example of the current President. Any simple google search, or a walk through a T-shirt shop will show you 1,000 mistakes he's made in a speech and use those as evidence that he is an idiot. Now, look at Obama and how well he speaks and the credibility it is building for him. Now, maybe Bush is an idiot, but I don't think we can conclude that just based on mistakes in his Public Speaking abilities--- now his foriegn policy choices-- thats another debate altogether.

Anonymous said...

Someone once tried to explain to me the rationale behind the "speed debate" move of recent years (and the subsequent loss of eloquence) by saying it brought us closer to "pure argumentation." The underlying assumption here is precisely what you mention: speaking well includes wisdom, not eloquence. In fact, this rationale goes a little bit further. Eloquence isn't just a matter of indifference but something that should be actively avoided because it obscures the wisdom. Naturally, this explanation of speed debate may not be entirely accurate, but even if false it did arouse my curiousity about eloquence in rhetoric.
As for your point on ignorance of style becoming a trend in modern scholarship, I'm not in a position to agree or disagree; I'm not well-read enough on that subject. I would say that several modern theories still allow for consideration of style (Bitzer's Rhetorical Situation, Burke's Dramatism, etc.). Whether scholars actually use the theories in this way or not is up in the air.

-neal

Kevin Keatley said...

I understand the difficulty of combining wisdom and style in public speech. For example the forensics community in general appreciates style over wisdom as I have watched final rounds at Nationals where people gave factually wrong speeches and place very well... simply because they had flawless delivery. On the other hand I have heard some debate rounds where the speakers were not the most eloquent, but the wisdom they used was unmatched and that allowed them to win. In some respects our society still struggles with which is more important: style or wisdom.

In the area of politics the same is true. When you watch CSPAN and see senators and representatives presenting on the floor of Congress many give factually accurate speeches but have little to no emotion. But, when these people show emotion it is often contrived and not believable.

I do not have trouble with Isocrates not being a champion of his own form of public speech. I think he would have readily admitted he was not the ideal orator, but that did not stop him from trying. Scholars long after Isocrates write about ideals that they cannot ever hope to achieve, but that should not diminish their ideas. Speaking well should have the power to convince and the power to move individuals to action; this is best achieved through style and wisdom. Perhaps this is what public speaking classes should be focusing on.