Monthly Archives: September 2021

Rory Stewart displays excellence

Posted on by
Reply

Rory Stewart is a very, very good speaker

I am there quoting myself in a posting from 1 November, 2013. Though I had to go back to check the date and details I have never forgotten the impact on me that speech had. Thus when I spotted this lecture at Yale, delivered in April 2018, I was eager to watch it if only to indulge myself.

I did more than check details on that previous post, I re-read it and will take back not a word. Rory Stewart is outstanding. We see him here displaying all the qualities of all the best speakers.

During preliminary chats with my trainees, I regularly hear the protestation that they’re “ok” when lucky enough to be dealing with subject matter they know really well, but when ordered to deliver a presentation on something of which they have scant knowledge they are less good. Well of course! In an ideal world no one would be asked to speak on something they didn’t really know (though there are tricks); but this isn’t an ideal world and adverse circumstances arise.

Stewart here is being rather better than “ok”.

We see him showing total command of his subject, quoting from memory myriad facts, figures and a wide range of random data, and we are reminded that he makes his own luck. Consider the extraordinary lengths to which he goes in order to get right under the skin of the communities and cultures with which he deals. In 2002 he took leave from his job with the British foreign service to walk across Asia, entitling him thereafter to speak for those at the grass roots as one who had lived there.

There is another less obvious quality to his knowledge of his subject. Deep knowledge brings with it a heightened awareness of that which you don’t know. Stewart’s willingness in this speech to admit to questions to which he has no answers speaks eloquently for his inner confidence. Insecurity would not allow that admission.

That quality enriches the questions he receives. Though the absence of an audience mic prevents us from properly hearing the questions, the way he addresses them seems to acknowledge their value; and his answers to these relatively random issues are as full of detailed data from memory as the main body of the speech.

Had I been in the audience I would have highlighted the way the developed world’s devotion to the preposterous climate change fallacy denies impoverished African countries access to cheap energy from coal. I would have challenged his repeatedly trotting out ‘legitimate state monopoly on the use of violence’ as a commonplace desirability, because defining ‘legitimate’ presents immediate knottiness, even if you are prepared to overlook the 2nd amendment in the US Bill Of Rights, and so on. His attitude throughout suggests he is open to debating all views, and the consequent conversation will be the richer for it.

Yes he really is a very good speaker, equipped with an outstanding memory, and amazingly adept at addressing matters that are miles outside his apparent expertise. Here is a speech that I offer as a bonus and which moved Madam Deputy Speaker to declare it one of the best speeches she had ever heard in the House of Commons.

Rusty Reno should trust himself

Posted on by
Reply

Last week we viewed a speech made by Tucker Carlson at a National Conservatism Conference in 2019. He was introduced by theologian R.R.Reno, widely known as ‘Rusty’, whose introduction was so well put together and delivered that I immediately went looking for a speech from him and found one at a plenary session at the same conference.

He is talking about Christian Universalism versus American Nationalism.

Not content with making a fine job of introducing Carlson, he makes an excellent job of introducing himself and his topic. For the first three quarters of a minute he tells us that he is going to address this knotty issue through the medium of seven propositions. So far so crystal clear, even up to and including his stating his first proposition.

That done he pulls his spectacles down from the crown of his head, peers through them at his script, and thereafter he might as well have been speaking in Klingon. Having been itching to learn more, I am now struggling to stay awake.

His first mistake is having as many as seven propositions. Unless his audience has been given a transcript of this talk they’re never going to remember all seven propositions still less the arguments that support them; and if they have been given a transcript why is he bothering to read it to them. They would make far more sense of it if they read it, each person absorbing it at his or her own pace.

Interestingly he seems to have managed to memorise all seven propositions because he raises his eyes to his audience to reveal each one. I’m prepared to bet that he can also remember all the arguments that support each one, but he doesn’t trust himself to do so because each time he plunges afresh into his script.

When will people learn that spoken English and written English are different languages? Write a learned treatise and any reasonably educated person will happily read and make sense of it. Read out a learned treatise and even a learned audience is as good as lost.

I wasn’t indulging in humorous hyperbole when I mentioned struggling to stay awake. I briefly dropped off and, deciding that my advanced years meant that this was one of those afternoons that would benefit from a nap, I went and had one. That was yesterday and, duly refreshed, I revisited the speech this morning only to drop off again. I still haven’t reached the end of the speech.

I have not a shred of doubt that Rusty Reno writes brilliant treatises. I also know from my own observation that he has all the makings of a fine speaker. All he needs to do is recognise that the two media are quite different, and then to prepare a clear mind-map enabling him to stand there, look at his audience and shoot his speech from the hip, just as he did with his excellent first 45 seconds. He needs to trust himself. I trust him.

Tucker Carlson homespun

Posted on by
Reply

On his recent visit to Hungary, Tucker Carlson made a powerful speech which I find I am unable to embed herein – I wonder why. Gab has it, but embedding seems to be blocked – I wonder why. YouTube has it in audio only – I wonder why. At least I am able to provide you with the respective hyperlinks.

I have had him on this blog before twice: here and here. But frustrated by not being able to include that Hungary speech below, I went looking for another and found a good one. It was delivered to a National Conservatism conference in June 2019.

I like this introducer. His name is R.R.(Rusty) Reno, and I have already found a speech of his that I hope to feature here shortly so I shall not dwell more than on this introduction. He is obviously winging it, and at the beginning when he talks of how the audience can submit questions for the Q&A, he “ums” along in a seemingly shambolic fashion. No speaker who is less than comfortable on a podium would dream of doing that, so my interest is already tickled. The rest is personal reminiscence, shot from the hip, and interesting. How much time was he assigned for the introduction? I don’t know, but he happens to finish this “umming” meander at 4 minutes to the second. That could be just chance, but I suspect his air of shambles masks a serious level of skill. And there’s a stronger piece of evidence. Beginning at 03:20 Reno talks of how Carlson in his interviewing confronts the leadership class both of Left and Right. Look at his gestures in that passage. When he says “Left” he indicates it with his right hand, and indicates “right” with his left hand. Isn’t that the wrong way round? No, it’s the right way for the audience. I teach my trainees “mirror gesturing” but otherwise it is as rare as integrity in a politician

I also like self-deprecation, and Tucker Carlson is good at it. The easiest way to be good at it is to mean it. I leave it to you to judge whether you think he actually does mean it, but I also like the rather wild, little-boy laughing that I’ve seen in other speeches but that he can’t deploy on television. The interlinear message is that you’ve seen the stuffed shirt on TV, now here’s the real deal. He implies a privilege to his audience, which is a subtle form of flattery.

Carlson shoots from the hip as all proper speakers do, and he’s an enthusiastic user of Anapodoton, even to the extent of suddenly greeting an audience member in the middle of a sentence (he did it in the Hungary speech too). It all reinforces the message that we are listening to a spontaneous and sincere stream of consciousness. It’s a strong message that audiences love. It’s also in its way unashamedly homespun, because he’s addressing and articulating feelings that most of us have.

His speech is essentially divided into three sections – good! – and the last one, beginning at about 20:25, is devoted to peaceful coexistence. Whatever happened to that? Where did Live-And-Let-Live go? I like this section because someone has to say this! Someone has to highlight the blindingly obvious point that almost everyone just wants to get on with their lives, rubbing along with their friends and neighbours and strangers they happen to meet. Yet there is a tiny, evil, power-mad and deafening clique of hate-fuelled, misanthropic arseholes that are hell-bent on making us all enemies of each other. Why do we ever listen to them?

Anyway it’s a good and absorbing speech, and also one of those where I urge you to stick around at the end to listen to the Q&A.