Читать книгу HOW TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC - Henry Dickson - Страница 13

CHAPTER VIII.
Debating

Table of Contents

Debating is excellent training. it teaches one to think quickly and logically, not to be afraid of an audience, and is undoubtedly the best of all training in public speaking. Not only are these powers to be gained by the practice of debating, but the debater who is accustomed to speaking will carry the same clearness of thought, confidence and positiveness of speech into business and social life, where he is sure to excel.

Daniel Webster, when asked the secret of his genius, replied: “There is no great secret. I simply keep my mind on my work. When a debate is before me I study the question in all its aspects. I think of it, dream about it. Day and night it is before me. The final effort I make people are pleased to call genius:”

It is an excellent plan to begin your debate by saying: “It is with great interest I have listened to the eloquent remarks of the gentleman who preceded me, and I fully agree with him as to,” etc., etc. “But how, on some other points, he could go so far away from the real facts at issue, I cannot at all understand.” Then proceed with your argument to point out how far from the facts your opponent is.

The following interesting and instructive article on “Public Speaking in American Colleges” will repay careful reading. The author, Mr. Byron V. Kanaley, is not only a most interesting speaker, but has given the subject careful attention and study, as will be noted by the fact that he was leader of the Notre Dame Universty victorious teams for four years and President Harvard University Debating Association for several years.

Public Speaking and Debating in American Colleges

By Byron V. Kanaley

A. B. Notre Dame ’04

LLB. Harvard ’07

[Leader of Notre Dame’s victorious debating teams for four years; membei of Harvard University debating team and Coach ’06-’07 Harvard class teams, and President ’05-’06 Harvard debating association. Mr. Kanaley at present is a member of the mortgage banking firm of Cooper, Kanaley & Co., Chicago.]

The American College no longer regards public speaking as a byplay but as a part of the serious work of a higher institution of learning. A generation ago the annual intercollegiate debate was like the old-fashioned spelling bee—there was a little hurried preparation and then a sort of pitched battle of wits.

Today, every detail of a public speaking contest, of which debating is the chief example, is gone over with extreme care. Even the question itself for debate is chosen after great deliberation, since the college proposing the question knows that by the rules of the game the opposing school will have the choice of sides; and so the form and wording of the question are most important to the end that the side left will be debatable.

I have known a week of earnest consideration to be given whether the proposition should be offered in the affirmative or the negative form.

Sides being chosen, the, real work of preparation begins. At the two American universities, where public speaking as a serious business probably has reached its highest development, namely, Notre Dame and Harvard, when debating is the thing in hand, the libraries are ransacked for material bearing on the question and the result indexed for ready use. About three weeks is given for “reading up” and then the trial debates begin. Ten minutes is allowed each contestant in which to talk on either side of the question he chooses. A gradual “weeding-out” is gone through until six men survive, three of whom compose the “Varsity” and three the “Scrubs.” Daily debates take place between these two teams for perhaps six weeks, and then comes the big contest with the rival college.

The methods pursued at Notre Dame and at Harvard differ radically only in one respect. At Notre Dame great attention is paid to polish and finish in the speaker. As an aid in attaining this, the two teams in final preparation for the intercollegiate contest always remain on the same respective sides of the question, the Varsity on the side it will have in the big debate. At Harvard, no man knows on any particular day which side of the question he is to talk on. As a result, Harvard produces a team which can talk equally well on either side of the question, while Notre Dame puts a team on the platform that knows all about both sides but which can talk best on their own chosen side. Harvard leaves the debate giving an impression of wide knowledge of the whole question. Notre Dame leaves the debate giving the impression she knows fairly well the whole question and all about her side of the question—and leaves the hall with the decision. Notre Dame’s method has gained her fifteen victories and but one defeat in twelve years.

In so brief an article as this, it is possible to give but the merest outline of the qualities necessary for success in public speaking in general and debating in particular.

Earnestness probably has first place. If you do not believe what you say, and say it as though you believed it, your audience will not be convinced—much less, three hard-headed judges.

Snap and terseness are absolutely essential. In the first place you are extremely limited as to time, and again there are five other men beside you who are there for a hearing and if you wish to emerge from the herd and be remembered by a set of tired judges, your words have got to have “go” to them.

Readiness in thinking on one’s feet often turns probable defeat into victory. I recollect a debate on Football between Yale and Harvard. A Harvard debater had spent most of his allotted time defending football as a college sport on the ground that football was analagous to war in that it instilled courage, obedience to discipline, the spirit of do or die to the last ditch, etc., etc., and he finished with a splendid and stirring defense of the game on purely patriotic grounds. He was followed by a Yale man who could think on his feet. The Yale man quietly remarked as he advanced to the front of the platform: “Yes, ladies and gentlemen, football is like war: a great many men have died in both.” The audience burst into laughter and applause, and then he went on with his set speech, showing the frightful list of dead and maimed in the history of the sport.

A highly cultivated and tenacious memory is absolutely essential for success in public speaking and particularly in debate. No one knows at what instant he may have to marshall facts or figures from hitherto dormant corners of his brain to meet some sudden and unexpected turn in the argument.

And lastly, as first, earnestness. This with the others wins. This without the others sometimes. The others without earnestness never.

So, be terse, be snappy, be agile of mind and sure in memory, be thorough in preparation, and in deadly earnest, that the judges or your audience may be of favoring mind and decision for your cause.