Tag Archives: Triad

Hilary Benn – better than some, but no cigar.

Posted on by
Reply

For the May ’12 Auracle newsletter I had been sniffing around the 2011 Labour Party Conference for speeches that provided interesting study.  I have previously posted a look at Ken Livingstone’s speech; but now –

Also at that conference was a speech by Hilary Benn.  He was looking at a script but not quite as often as some.  (Have you noticed how tolerant I am becoming of politicians who are buried in their scripts?  It’s because I have come to expect no better from them.  Previous generations of politicians didn’t need scripts: you can’t use one when you’re standing on a soapbox.)

What is interesting about his speech is that he has learnt some classic principles and he uses them. It was by no means flawless: for instance there was a problem with the Hump, not just his but the audience’s.  There was no Face, but still there was some copy-book stuff.  Let’s go through it…

  • 0:32  “Where we got it wrong…” he added a dramatic shrug, but his hump caused him to hurry it and render it pointless.
  • 1:21  “We made the right choice that day.”  The audience, still not yet warmed to him, gave merely 4 seconds applause.  [N.B. Par for applause within a speech is 8 seconds.]
  • 1:30  “ I’ve got a bit of news for you.”  This was unnecessary.  The audience had got the point and was already laughing.  In fact this addendum actually suppressed the laugh a little.
  • 1:43  “To protect …”   He used an anaphora triad.
  • 1:45  My writing mentor, a million years ago, told me, “Never ever say never ever”.  Does the same rule apply to speaking?  I’m not sure.
  • 2:25 This would have been funnier if he’d done it later, because (a) he would have delivered it better, and (b) the audience would have been more receptive.  In the event it part-died.
  • 3:16  The audience now warmed up, he got his full 8 seconds of applause.
  • 3:46  “He promised…”  Another anaphora triad, rather a protracted one.
  • 4:48, 5:52, 6:51  Three bouts of applause – all 8 seconds long – and he spread them out, giving the audience around a minute each time to recover.
  • 7:32 “Remind them…” Anaphora, but not a triad.  He extended to 5 elements of repetition.
  • 8:42  “We have the …” Anaphora, and building to his finish he gave this one a whopping 7 elements.  He delivered them all without reference to his script.  He doesn’t need the bloody thing: it’s just a comfort blanket.  Take your thumb out of your mouth, Hilary, and throw away the paper!  You won’t believe how liberating that will feel.

His old man was pretty good – still is.  Hilary Benn now needs to learn to do without a script.   He also needs to be conscious of The Hump – not just his but also that of the audience.  You can’t play an audience anything like as much as he clearly wanted till you have them warmed to you.  In this speech he could have had them standing on their heads after around the 3-minute mark.  Before that he just needed to relax them.

This generation of politicians needs hustings experience.

Obama – speaking flaws.

Posted on by
Reply

President Obama is an interesting study for me. Since he first started campaigning for the US presidency, he has been hailed by nearly everyone as a great orator; yet his speaking is flawed in so many areas! For instance, his enunciation is terrible. A reader who happens to be a past trainee has suggested I do a critique of his acceptance speech after the recent election; and that is firmly on my to-do list. Meanwhile here, from the Auraclenewsletter of March 2011, is an observation on how basic errors took the shine off an important, high-profile speech.

On 1 February, 2011, President Obama spoke at The White House about the (then) political turmoil in Egypt. Watching it, I was thinking what a copybook example he was giving us on how not to enunciate. Syllables were going AWOL all over the place. [If you want to know my teaching on enunciation, my book The Face & Tripod covered it briefly and my later booklet Every Word Heard focused specifically on it.]

And then he hit us with this triad,

“An orderly transition must be meaningful, it must be peaceful and it must begin now.”

As triads go it’s actually a rather clunky example; but because it was a triad it achieved the desired effect – worldwide headlines.

In The Face & Tripod there’s a Chapter that deals with triads. In it I was principally concerned with using them covertly in order not to alienate the more cynical and sophisticated, triad conscious, members of the audience (because the business world is my niche and business audiences can be very cynical). And with my tongue firmly in my cheek I concluded the chapter with a tiny paragraph that was a veritable orgy of triads – four of them in just over two lines. And I have since found several readers who never even noticed – that’s covert for you!

But let me justify my use of the word ‘clunky’, to criticise Obama’s triad. If you are going to deploy an overt triad, at least make it elegant! Those who have attended my Master-classes are familiar with anaphora: a series of phrases or sentences whose beginnings are the same. Had Obama merely left off the two occasions he used the word ‘it’ we’d have been presented with a triad anaphora. Compare the two by saying them aloud.

His –

“An orderly transition

  • must be meaningful,
  • it must be peaceful, and
  • it must begin now.”

Mine –

“An orderly transition

  • must be meaningful,
  • must be peaceful, and
  • must begin now.”

By simply removing a tiny word I contend that the latter is smoother, more elegant and rhythmic. The former is smudgy and clumsy.  Clunky.

Am I splitting hairs?  Yes of course I am.  But when you are preparing an important speech you should consider the potential value of every fraction of every percent.

And yet, for all that, he got his headlines! There’s the ultimate lesson: triads excite interest – even when they’re clunky. So use them.

Perhaps while I’m about it I also ought to give an example that justifies my dismissal of Obama’s enunciation.  He has clearly worked very hard on portraying statesmanship: his body-language, from his scalp to his toes, screams authority. As part of that he has adopted a manner of speaking that seeks to defy contradiction. That manner causes him to drop heavily at the ends of phrases and sentences. In so doing he loses final syllables. There are dozens of examples: let me give you just one that repeats often. The word ‘people’ invariably comes out as ‘peep’.

It is perfectly possible to deliver that vocal authority without losing syllables: you just need to know how. Maybe someone will tell him – if he’ll listen. Heads of State really do need to get it right.