Prepared Speech Resource Table of Contents

Transcription

Copyright © 2007 by DemiDec Corporation. DemiDec, Power Guide, Scholar’s Cup, and Scholar’s Quiz are all registered trademarks of the DemiDec Corporation. Academic Decathlon, USAD, and Super Quiz are registered trademarks of the United States Academic Decathlon Association. DEMIDEC CORPORATION 1006 WALL ST. LOS ANGELES, CA 90015 Toll‐free (866) 336‐4332 Fax (603)297‐7038 [email protected] www.demidec.com Prepared Speech Resource Table of Contents Introduction: You are 24 ............................................................................................. 4 Initial Speech Guidelines .......................................................................................... 5 Prepared Speech Synopses ...................................................................................... 11 Preparing Your Prepared Speech ........................................................................... 48 Improvement .............................................................................................................. 63 The Topic Hunter ...................................................................................................... 69 150+ Potential Speech Topics .................................................................................. 74 Gold Medal Showcase ............................................................................................. 78 About the Authors .................................................................................................. 100 by with Daniel Berdichevsky Robert Pazornik Harvard University M.P.P. Stanford University B.A. & M.A. Yale University M.A. Notre Dame University B.A. for Dr. William Hurlbut and the ever‐expanding triangle of human possibility SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 4 OF 100
DEMIDEC RESOURCES © 2007
1
Introduction: You are 24 Your speech should be like an episode of any addictive TV series. Hook your judges with the opening sequence and then keep them moving along a taut plotline from start to finish. Surprise judges without ever confusing them. Special effects are great—hand motions and the like—but the key is to use them to create an emotionally satisfying storyline. How to achieve all this? Choose a subject that you care about that others can care about too. And don’t start too early: open your speech in the middle of the action or with an intriguing puzzle. Whether you already have a speech you’re perfecting, or are still casting about for the perfect idea, this resource is meant to help you win medals. Topics include: ♦
♦
♦
♦
♦
♦
finding an engaging and fresh topic writing the best possible text choosing how to start your speech overcoming any nervousness about speaking practicing the basics of good speaking: voice modulation, gestures, etc… improving a speech over time The opening guidelines are a good summary of the rest of the resource. They’re meant to give you a sense of what to keep in mind as you write and practice your speech. The prepared speech synopses analyze many different categories of speeches, from patriotic to personal. Afterward, guest author Robert Pazornik provides his own compendium of advice on speech development, while Michael Kim adds a topic hunter and a number of exercises to help with fundamental speaking skills. The concluding gold medal showcase includes the text of select winning speeches, many with explanations by their authors of why they wrote and delivered them as they did. A Note On the 2004 and 2008 Elections Though one presidential election was decided three years ago and another is roaring into the primaries, both past and present campaigns offer insight into the issues that matter to the country (and to Iowa)—as well as into speechwriting and delivery. You should search for the text of speeches by Edwards, Obama, Romney, Hillary, etc. You can even watch them on YouTube. In 2004, neither Kerry nor Bush was a very polished orator. If the President of the United States doesn’t have to be perfect on stage2, neither do you. In the end, the prepared speech isn’t about achieving the ideal form of a Speech; it’s about getting your message across effectively and in a likeable way. In a sense, you want your judges to vote for you. So it can be worthwhile to scrutinize how actual candidates try to achieve the same goal. Hopefully an earlier season. Two recent presidents whom you might want to emulate as speakers are Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. Both were great communicators. Among the current candidates, Obama is often heralded as a good speaker. Hillary, alas, is no Bill. 1
2
SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 5 OF 100
Initial Speech Guidelines In the Academic Decathlon, you’ll face competition from both oratorical novices and fiery veterans. Some Decathletes are long‐time participants in Speech and Debate. Others have performed Shakespeare since they were old enough to rhyme. No matter what your level of experience, you can succeed in the speech event: just be certain to select a heartfelt and unexpected speech topic. It needs to be something you can deliver for months without ever tiring of it. These last two years, I have known Decathletes who gave speeches on pennies, the country of Dubai, the existence of Santa Claus and why the Flying Spaghetti Monster ought to be taught in science classes. They spoke with energy and originality; they were clearly having a good time, and they won medals. But I have also known Decathletes who gave speeches on computer game addiction, the wisdom of grandparents and the struggle with breast cancer—all important topics, but that were less original, less controversial, and ultimately less successful. Just this morning as I edit this, an article appeared in my Google headlines about “a bra that stopped a speeding bullet.” It seems a woman at a New Year’s celebration in Florida was hit by a stray bullet on New Year’s Eve, and her bra strap slowed it enough to prevent her from being seriously wounded. It occurred to me as I read about it that a Decathlon speech on the history of the bra might include this story—or even open with it. It might be fun. This takes us straight into the first guideline, already implied above. Here We Go Again You don’t want to give a speech that the judges feel like they’ve heard before. This is often the case with the first topic you think of, so don’t hesitate to change topics. And if your topic feels like something that might have been done before, see if you can think of a new way to approach it. One Taft Decathlete gave what might sound like an ordinary speech on the importance of increasing voter turnout. His trick, though, was to offer a unique way to achieve this: by having political candidates meet in actual wrestling matches instead of structured debates. The topic was familiar, but his interpretation completely outside the box. We’ll come back to this speech again later. Show, Don’t Tell Avoid telling judges what to think, or what a particular experience meant to you. The phrase “I realized that…” usually means you’re telling too much, or even preaching, instead of allowing the judges to reach their own conclusions. For example, if you’re describing the poverty you witnessed last summer in remote region of Africa, describe it as it was, with clarity, honesty and a few vivid details. Avoid layering in your own commentary and interpretations; the image should be enough. If while there you realized that your own life had been a wasteful one, don’t say in your speech, “I realized then that my life was wasteful.” Instead, give a specific anecdote, “Only six days earlier, I had stood in my hometown SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 6 OF 100
Wal‐Mart choosing between brands of beef jerky.” Your judges should get the point; if they don’t, keep refining your speech until they do. Don’t Be Too Easy on the Judges A speech criticizing genocide is not a hard speech. Who can argue against it? But it risks being so easy it’s unimpressive. You need to make sure that you challenge the judges. Don’t make it too effortless on them to nod and agree with you. A speech on how women deserve equal treatment in education is not very challenging—unless you somehow trap your judges into first nodding, then realizing that they have different expectations for their sons and daughters. Ask them if they ever bought their baby girl something pink. Find the Best Possible Opening Homer began The Iliad in the middle of the siege of Troy. This is an example of what literary scholars call in media res—beginning in the middle. Many less epic films follow a similar principle. Consider Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind or, more recently, Mission Impossible 3, which opens with Tom Cruise’s character being interrogated—and with his wife about to be executed. The movie then loops back to explain the backstory. In your Decathlon speech, consider starting in a similar way—in the middle of your argument. This applies especially well to speeches that appear to be chronological, such as treating the history of the women’s rights movement. Just because something happened first in history doesn’t mean it has to happen first in your speech. Consider an example from a speech mentioned earlier, on increasing voter turnout. In the original version of his speech, the speaker, David, began rather blandly by describing the importance of voter turnout and the failure of most approaches to increasing it, such as MTV’s Rock the Vote. Then, about a third of the way into his speech, he introduced his proposal: wrestling matches between political candidates. He would then break into his “radio announcer voice” and declare, loudly, Ladies and gentlemen! The first time I heard him do this, I was blown away. His voice boomed as he described Bush and Kerry in the ring with vivid, politically perfect details: moves like tax upper cuts and Vietnamese flip‐
flops. Yet the speech had been so boring until then that I couldn’t give him a perfect score at the end. Instead, I suggested that he try moving that remarkable sequence to his opening. He could surprise the judges by looking like a calm, sweet boy when he walked in the room, then opening his speech with his earth‐shaking Ladies and gentlemen! He could then narrate the fight before returning to his normal voice and explaining that this was his proposal for increasing voter turnout—and then giving some of the same historical background that had previously been part of his introduction. This way, he could capture the judges from his very first words. The change worked. Few speeches can be twisted so dramatically that the middle becomes the opening exactly as is, but many can benefit from a similar thought process: if your best stuff is in the middle, skip right to it so that you’ve put your best foot forward at the outset. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 7 OF 100
Trim Your Scenes On a similar note, one of the most important jobs in film production is editing—slicing a scene down to size so that it starts exactly when it needs to and no earlier, then ends as soon as it can and no later. A lot can be implied. A person begins to step out of a car, then cut and he’s already standing. Removing the “fluff” improves pacing and engages the audience. The same applies in your speech. Ask yourself which phrases and sentences are implied by those around them, then cut them. You should speak slowly (to be understood) but your speech should move quickly (to be exciting.) Dress Look your best. Wear suits, slacks, skirts, dresses, whatever makes you both comfortable and dignified. Formalwear is preferable to team uniforms. If you’re having trouble with something like your tie, ask for help. You don’t want your wardrobe to malfunction at competition. Posture Stand straight and still. When you’re not using your hands, rest them somewhere natural, but don’t let them hang to your sides. Some people find the most comfortable resting position for their hands is clasped together over the abdomen. Don’t fumble with notecards, and don’t sway or wobble. Practice standing on a very small surface, such as a rock surrounded by a pool of water. You’ll learn not to shuffle your feet quickly if shuffling means falling into the water. Changing Locations You may want to take steps back and forth for theatrical effect during your speech. Be sure to restore a stable position whenever you do so. Don’t practice this on the rock. Smiling Smiling is more important in the impromptu and interview, but in the prepared speech, it can still be used to good effect. Be certain to smile broadly and genuinely before beginning your speech, and again after you finish it (unless your topic treats something very morbid.) Eye Contact Don’t stare at any single judge for the whole four minutes—and don’t look over or past them out of the room. Focus on one at a time, except for certain literally pivotal moments in your speech when you should swivel your head and gaze at all three in rapid succession. The Martial Art of Hand Gestures Be natural. We recommend that unless you’re very skilled at hand motions, don’t attempt too many overly deliberate effects—but if you’re describing how the Flying Spaghetti Monster shaped DNA with its noodly appendages, feel free to wiggle your fingers to simulate this. Don’t use the same motion over and over again. Avoid chopping the air with straight linear motions. Aim to use curves as often as possible. Imagine a sphere in front of you, and keep your SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 8 OF 100
hands along its surface. Think of your elbow as the center of a wheel. (More experienced speakers can choreograph a speech so well it becomes a kind of rhetorical ballet.) Handshakes When you walk into the room and meet your judges, keep your hands dry and introduce yourself to each in turn. Shake hands firmly, making eye contact each time. Don’t shake hands with one judge while already looking at the next judge. If you’re used to shaking hands weakly, or to just brushing fingertips, break the habit. If, however, a judge offers you a dainty handshake, don’t respond by squeezing him or her to the bone. Your judges may want to shake your hand again when you leave. If not, feel free to offer it to them with a smile and a thank you. If you’re very lucky, you can pull a Borat and give the judges a high‐five. Making an Entrance Some Decathletes we’ve known would introduce themselves to the judges with a grin and a funny word or two—for instance, when a judge once began by saying, “Hi, I’m Mary, I’ll be your judge today,” the student responded, “Hi, I’m David, I’ll be your speaker today”—in hopes of setting a positive tone. Another Decathlete reported that she put her judges at ease by lending one of them a blanket to keep warm. Opportunities to amuse the judges with your entrance, let alone dress them, are undoubtedly rare, but if you come upon one, seize it. No Index Cards One sure way to impress your judges is to memorize your speech so well that you don’t need to carry index cards with you. This can be something of a risk, but students without index cards tend to learn their speeches more quickly, vary their voice more dynamically and score more points than those who keep them, even just “for emergencies.” Emergencies don’t happen if you don’t have an emergency response measure in mind.3 Let Your Words Go Badaboom In French, something that rolls in front of your car (for instance, as you’re driving through the Patagonian pampa) goes “badaboom.” Say it out loud. The word is expressive—its rhythm and shape suggest exactly what’s happening. Try to write speeches where the words similarly have an evocative shape and rhythm to them. Often, a series of short, one‐syllable words can get the heart of a listener beating in tune with you. Then—break up the sequence with a longer word for emphasis. Record Your Speech It can be painful, but if someone videos you presenting your speech, you can witness first‐hand the strengths and flaws of your own performance. Audio recordings can be even more useful; you can carry them with you on your Zune4 or in your car and listen to the natural flow and cadence of your own speaking voice, thus aiding you as you develop your style, and making it easier for you to memorize all the words. Also, if time permits, try creating a recording where each team member reads every other member’s speech aloud. Listening to someone else’s voice sound out your sentences will teach you a lot about different ways to phrase and deliver your own speech. This is, of course, a poor idea in other contexts, like airplanes. Anyone want to give an anti‐iPod speech? 3
4
SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 9 OF 100
Never Freeze‐Dry Your Speech You will probably develop one speech, toss it aside, and develop another before settling on a final topic that suits your needs and personality. Even then, don’t stop developing the speech over time. Integrate advice from each panel of judges that listens to it, and practice it often with people who aren’t afraid to critique it—such as your coaches, parents and teammates. Adding new material and changing words here and there can keep your presentation fresh and on the path toward perfection (you’ll never quite get there, but you can come closer and closer.) If all you do after every panel of judges is work on your presentation, without adjusting the text of the speech, you’re missing out on half the value of practicing with judges instead of on your own. Sentiment Some people can imitate emotions with startling authenticity. They can cry, laugh and anger on command. However, the most touching moments come when you actually experience something and communicate it each time you deliver your speech. For instance, one Asian‐American Decathlete I knew spoke about relations between parents and their children in her culture. Though she never mentioned her own parents, you could tell she was speaking of herself. It never failed to move everyone involved. By the last line, both she and, often, her judges would be tearing up. She didn’t tell the judges what to feel—she just showed them what her parents, and her life, were like. Watch For Simple Grammatical Mistakes Many speeches with language errors are delivered at competition, costing their speakers points. To prevent this from happening to you, make sure a skilled editor reads over a draft of your speech at least twice—once, when you first write it, and again when you’re done with your major revisions. An English teacher is a good bet, or a journalism advisor. Don’t memorize your speech until you’ve had this done. Everyone makes writing mistakes, so don’t assume your prose will be perfect; in fact, you can assume it’s not. Bust the Ghostwriter Some teams bring in professionals or tap more experienced students to write speeches for certain Decathletes. This is against the rules, as is giving the same speech two years in a row. Practice Often If possible, start working on your speech the summer before competition. Then, deliver it at all available moments—it shouldn’t ever take longer than four minutes. Showers, automobiles, dinner tables and bus stops have all proven popular places for speech practice. Also, make certain that periodically, a model panel of judges—with real scoring rubrics—listens to your team’s speeches. Team parents can be great at this. However, make sure that you don’t always know your judges beforehand. At competition you won’t, and you need to be ready for that. Talk in Class Many top teams roam their schools, delivering their speeches to crowded classrooms of peers who tend to be brutally helpful critics. Once you’ve spoken in front of that girl you’ve liked since seventh grade, you can speak in front of pretty much anyone. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 10 OF 100
Scoring Rubric Carefully study the rubric which judges will use to score you at competition. If your coach doesn’t have a copy, a local coordinator should be able to provide one. Note that on the usual rubric, there is as much attention paid to your presentation as to your content—but that what really matters, in the end, is the overall impression you leave the judges. They want to hear you speak with eloquence and hold yourself with grace. To risk a bit of melodrama, they want to be singed by the flame of your thoughts—especially after lunch, when they might otherwise fall asleep. Don’t Take Pride In Improvising Certain Decathletes never memorize their speeches. They may never bother, or they may simply enjoy the adrenaline rush that comes from “making up” parts of their speeches on competition day. A few share crazy tales of writing their speeches on the bus to competition. I can’t count how many times I’ve heard the “I wrote my speech that same morning and won a medal” myth. Even if it does occasionally happen, don’t fall for this—because it usually won’t. At the highest level of Academic Decathlon, you will be up against people who are rehearsed and passionate. No matter how good you are off‐the‐cuff, you can’t risk losing points to someone who has every word, pause and gesture down pat. As in Iraq, Transition With Care If you ever find yourself using the phrases, “first,” “second,” “in conclusion,” or “another way in which…” stop and take a careful look at the transitions between the ideas in your speech. Later in this resource, Robert Pazornik writes at length about ways to improve ideational flow—you might want to skip ahead to that if you’re interested. Similar advice applies to the Decathlon essay event. Explore New Borders One underutilized source of possible speech ideas is the “new and noteworthy” section of the local bookstore. When I checked it while writing this resource, I found books on the history of lying, new theories about human behavior, a volume on the philosophy of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the story behind the Segway, the history of absolute zero, and much more—any of which might spark a good topic. Though I never learned for certain if there was a connection, one of the best‐received speeches at nationals a few years ago was on the Tao of Winnie the Poo—the subject of a popular new book the previous year. Another good place to check is Yahoo “Odd News”—where you can read about a French woman who froze her babies in a Korean refrigerator, or about the death of the man who invented Ramen noodles. Controversy You may wish to skirt the very controversial and the ludicrous. One student I know delivered a medal‐winning speech promoting euthanasia, but he was very careful to take a relatively moderate view, and to respond to counter‐arguments. You’ll probably want to steer clear of topics like abortion rights and gun control. One can tweak too many toes. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 11 OF 100
Prepared Speech Synopses Each of the following synopses describes a different kind of speech, ranging from the personal to the controversial to the humorous. All of them include annotated excerpts from or the entire text of actual speeches, many of them gold medal winners. Detailed delivery tips are meant to help readers imagine how these speeches—and their own—would sound before a panel of judges. The idea behind these synopses is that what most Decathletes need in writing the text of a speech is not so much a professional eying his or her every move as it is a helpful nudge, a bit of a model to follow. In a sense, these synopses are templates of a very general sort. And in the end, they will succeed whenever they stir you to a brainstorm—and you will succeed, whenever your own speech stirs someone else in the same way. The fourteen included categories are:

The informative speech The persona speech The disappearing value speech The American ideal speech The technology speech The academic speech The American patriot speech The personal speech The safe speech The metaphorical speech The humorous speech The alternate history speech The controversial speech The satirical speech The bolded speech types are entirely new in the 2007 edition, and the italicized ones include fresh model speeches. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 12 OF 100
THE INFORMATIVE SPEECH
Let Me Tell You The informative speech can be zesty and fun; it tends to shine a spotlight on something that people don’t stop to think about very often. It is not the same as an academic speech, which we will discuss later, in that it doesn’t need to be “deep”—just interesting. Also, it is almost always at least a little bit funny—often through the choice of subject matter. Consider the speech below, delivered by Tom Yang, who scored 9,258 points. The introduction begins with some common sayings that should puzzle judges just enough to satisfy them when they learn what the speech is actually about in the fourth fifth sentence. These sayings
should be familiar to
nearly any judge.
A penny for your thoughts? Just a dime a dozen. Two sides of the same coin. By asking what they
have in common
instead of just
saying what it is, the
speaker invites the
judges to
participate. He
continues to draw in
the judges with
statements like
“You may
wonder…”
What do all these have in common? Coins. Coins show up constantly in our lives whether you’re buying a soda, tossing a coin, or using coin‐related idioms. But the other side of the coin is that people don’t really know much about coins. You may wonder, “why use coins at all? They’re not worth much, and a hassle to carry around.” Coins may indeed have little utility today, but without them, trade and commerce would never have developed, and we would still be in a barter economy. So now, let me give you my two cents’ worth, and tell you all about the fascinating world of coins, or, to use a 50‐cent word, numismatics. Informative speeches almost always include a historical element—be it the invention of hairspray or the Roman aqueduct. Here, the speech
glides from history
to the present day.
History is
complemented here
by science. Bringing
in a second
discipline
strengthens a
speech. Ever since Julius Caesar put his portrait on Roman coins, their basic design has not changed much—a portrait on one side, and a symbolic image on the other. Nonetheless, picking a design is not easy—not only does it need to be beautiful and detailed, but also easily recognizable and embody culture and values. An excellent case in point is the new California state quarter, which depicts John Muir overlooking Half Dome, with the California Condor soaring in the background. The selection of this design over thousands of others not only speaks to the aesthetic merit of the design, but also to the natural beauty and conservationism that characterizes our state. After a design is chosen, the coins can be struck—but struck on what? In the old days, a coin was simply gold, silver, or copper. Nowadays, virtually every metal and compound is use—from radioactive Hafnium to Nordic Gold, and even from charcoal to clay! The first coins were struck using a hammer. Since then, various presses have been developed, leading to modern electric presses that can strike coins with up to 360 tons of force per square inch, and produce 75 million coins in one SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 13 OF 100
day! Striking finishes the two sides, heads and tails, but there is a third side: the edge. Edges can be plain, like the penny and the nickel; or they can have ridges, like the dime and the quarter. The ridges were originally meant to prevent unscrupulous people from shaving the silver off those coins. Now, with advanced technology, even words can be inscribed on the edges! …and from the
present day into the
future.
The speech wraps
up both by bring it
back to the judges—
and by recalling the
aphorisms with
which it began. This
kind of circularity is
always a strength. The coins of the future may look very different from the typical round, monochrome coins in your wallet. Even now, there are coins that break from the ordinary—with shapes ranging from heptagons to hearts, and even electric guitars! Furthermore, coins can be printed with vivid colors, or even with mesmerizing holograms, bringing the metallic images to life—from butterflies and vintage cars to cathedrals and queens. And as proof that these magnificent coins aren’t too far away from turning up as pocket change, Canada released the red poppy 25 cent in 2004, the first ever colored circulation coin. So, the next time you get some change from the vending machine or toss a coin to make a decision, pause a bit to appreciate how much thought and technology went into that coin before relegating it to the depths of your pocket. After all, these coins are definitely not a dime a dozen. Most informative speeches, at least the successful ones, share the light tone of the one above. Informative speeches can fail, however, when they are on subjects that are too conventional, too list‐like, or just sort of irrelevant. Some Decathletes felt this was the case at nationals a few years ago, when an informative speech on how to treat snakebites made the speech showcase, but did not seem to have much of a point. The “topic hunter” later in this resource suggests a number of places to look for informative ideas, but your best bet is to look for things in life that are all around us, but don’t get talked about very much—like doorknobs. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 14 OF 100
THE PERSONA SPEECH
I Am Someone Else The speaker presenting a persona speech assumes someone else’s identity in order to personalize an issue. Rather than offer a third‐person account of, say, the deforestation of the Pacific Northwest, the speech might come from the point of view of a girl who has always camped in the woods with her family—or from the point of view of a tree! A speech given as an Iraqi father whose child died in a bombing may prove more compelling than the clinical account of an American observer. The first half‐minute of the speech should introduce the persona. The key is to ensure the persona differs significantly from the true speaker and that it is clear who you are pretending to be. The following example of a persona introduction comes from the gold‐medal winning speech in the honors category at a past national competition: The identity is
introduced in a very
straightforward way.
The speaker
debated whether to
include the words
“Imagine that” and
ultimately decided
to do so.
Emphasize the word
“different.”
Note the use of
triplet phrases—
“uncouth, rude, and
generally
disrespectful” and
“McDonald’s,
Burger King and
Taco Bell.” When
listing examples of a
phenomenon or
describing with
adjectives, consider
using sets of three.
More is too tedious.
Imagine that I am Daniela Martén, an 18 year‐old Costa Rican. For years, my father’s restaurant had been one of the more popular ones in San Jose, the capital of Costa Rica... until the tourists came. I was only six years old when the foreigners inundated my country, changing my life forever. We had encountered tourists before, but this was different. These new tourists were uncouth, rude and generally disrespectful of our culture. They mocked us when we spoke in Spanish, our native tongue, and chided us when we were unable to respond to them in English. As if these inconsiderate offenses were not bad enough, they avoided eating our ethnic foods, choosing to spend their precious money at American fast food restaurants. This put my family and me in direct competition with McDonald’s, Burger King and Taco Bell. At first, we tried to stay in business, but the cheaper, mass‐produced products of the fast food restaurants invariably made our attempts futile. This unfair, unjustified competition ultimately forced us to sell our business and the home my family had lived in for eight generations. This introduction illustrates important ingredients in a persona speech—among them, the assumed name and corresponding voice, the key phrase “imagine” tipping off judges to the nature of the speech, and diction appropriate to the persona. Delivery requires more than the words on paper, however. Someone giving this particular speech must emphasize the heritage of the speaker—for instance, a hint of Daniela Marten’s accent, or at least her emotions. She is a foreigner speaking to the Americans who have wrecked her land. Her tone should reflect this. The same generalizations apply to all persona speeches. Such an introduction should be followed by solid evidence supporting the persona’s opinions. In this speech, statistics that testify to “the systematic social and spiritual destruction of a people” would lend credibility to the persona. Well‐placed quotes and appropriate word choice strengthen both the imaginative flavor and the persona’s idealistic fervor. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 15 OF 100
The following quotes from the body of the speech show its movement from the development of the persona to the demonstration of evidence: “Misses the point”
can be combined
with an effective
hand gesture—
which also helps to
distract from the
sweeping
generalization that
follows.
Choose simple,
sobering statistics.
Trying to determine the balance between harm and good that tourism does in the Third World misses the point. It does nothing but harm. The number of monkeys in my country has decreased by seventy‐three percent between 1980 and 1990. The persona has maintained the personal touch but raised issues far more pivotal than the welfare of her father’s fast food establishment. The structure of the actual sentences is ideal for speaking out loud—first long phrases, then short pivotal summations—“nothing but harm.” The persuasive conclusion of this particular speech evokes the judge’s sentiment—a powerful tool when done correctly. Note that it redirects attention away from broad issues back to the plight of the persona– I love my country. I don’t want to see my culture destroyed. Next time you go to a foreign country, remember me. Potential Applications Of The Persona Speech The persona speech is an appealing format for people with a talent for acting who want to bring a very personal touch to an abstract or foreign topic. For example, a speech could be written from the persona of the “unknown soldier.” Such a speech would detail the exploits—and exploitations—of the common military man, calling for the audience to respect these hidden victims of history for their service and their sacrifice. A very talented speaker may wish to compose a speech with two personas. They could debate an issue or present two perspectives on a tragedy. One might be male, the other female; or one might be tall, the other short. The contrast is key. To be effective, such a speech would require the speaker be capable of changing voice, tone, inflection and even posture and gestures with each persona. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 16 OF 100
THE DISAPPEARING VALUE SPEECH
The Good Gold Days Not all speeches need to deal with pressing current events or incidents in the speaker’s life. Judges for the Decathlon tend to be volunteer teachers and other individuals with an interest in youth and education. They may recoil at certain aspects of a changing world, or regret that certain institutions and values have fallen out of style. Speeches can leverage this nostalgia. The speech below targets the decline of reading in modern times. Similar speeches could discuss the apparent decay of musical taste, the collapse of the American work ethic, the increased fragmentation of family structures, and so forth. A speaker presenting a topic along these lines should try not to depress the audience. Rather, the purpose should be to show “that all is not lost” if action is taken—that there is always hope. Imagination and concern are appropriate, but not wanton pessimism. There is room for the personal experience in the disappearing value speech. Perhaps the discussed value had special significance to the speaker. It almost must have, in order to result in an effective, meaningful speech. You should tell of this personal connection. The introduction of the following speech by a gold‐medal‐winning Decathlete portrays a painful picture. However, by starting at despair, the speaker allows for progress to hope and optimism while also underscoring the importance of his topic: “picture, if you will”
is a variant on a
classic opening for
Decathlon
speeches. It can be
more effective just
to dive directly into
the imagery itself.
Picture, if you will,
how this speech
would sound if it
opened with, “A
tombstone. A grave.
An inscription.”
Allusions to recent
pop culture are a
good idea.
Picture, if you will, a tombstone, a dark tombstone rising above a freshly dug grave. This is not the marker for a soldier lost in battle. It is not the marker for a person at all. No, written across it are only a few simple words: ʺIn memory of the book. Born 3500 B.C, died 2000 A.D. The End.ʺ This is a world in which books have outlived their usefulness—in which illiteracy is no longer an issue. No one needs to be literate. There is nothing left to read. There are no more epics—no Harry Potter—no Homer. No bedtime stories. No wild flights of the imagination. No Decathlon booklets to study! The muses have closed up shop, Hannibal has eaten his last victim, and Sherlock Holmes is finally dead. The above forecast should engage and concern the judges. They know that the speaker is exaggerating reality—but they know every hyperbole has a reason at its heart. The speaker has obligated himself to fulfill a promise—some manner of avoiding this grisly end. The body of the speech, then, must continue to use vibrant images while drawing in meaningful support. Logic is key here. Consider the following quotes: SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 17 OF 100
FIRST—THE CULPRIT: look to craft “power
phrases” like
“television acts only
as fertilizer for
couch potatoes”.
Television acts only as fertilizer for couch potatoes. It offers the population passive entertainment that requires little input other than the choice of a channel to watch. This is a pastime that does nothing more than pass time. SECOND—CONCRETE SUPPORT: Every speech
should try to include
at least one quote
and/or statistic. In
fact, it’s become a
Decathlon
convention.
According to a study by the psychologist Roger Liebert, the average American spends four and a half hours a day watching television. To keep this in perspective, think about it like this: someone who lives to be seventy years old will have dedicated a full fifteen years of his or her life to TV. THIRD—A SOLUTION: Many Decathlon
speeches criticize
technology, faulting
it for social decline.
Here the speaker
turns to it for help.
Note that the
speaker briefly and
subtly explains what
the World Wide Web
is, rather than
assuming the
judges will know.
It is true that advances in computer technology have given rise to a twist on the traditional book that may woo back even dedicated couch potatoes. Like the Choose‐
Your‐Own‐Adventure novels of yesteryear, these new books are fully interactive, developing differently with each reading. Or consider the World Wide Web—a medium for communication which includes not just images and sounds, but real text. Maybe people will be drawn back to reading through these cybernetic nuggets of prose. Maybe one day all books will be distributed electronically. But whatever the case, maybes don’t happen by themselves. We must try and make these maybes be. The body of any disappearing value speech might follow a similar outline, from an explanation to evidence to an established solution. The following excerpt from the conclusion maintains this theme– …remember, four of the five letters in the word “world” are the word “word.” If we stop writing, if we stop reading, we will stop moving the world forward. The book is not yet dead, for, when it dies, so shall the stories—and glories—of humankind… A Potential Twist Of The Disappearing Value Speech The disappearing value speech is ideal for someone who can convey genuine concern. One twist, however, might be to speak about how certain values have not so much disappeared as taken new forms, and how the world is not as bad a place as it may seem to someone fixated on the “good old days.” Indeed, ours is hardly the first generation to look back nostalgically at past times and points at decaying values—examples of past times this concern has been expressed, such as following the emancipation of slaves and the women’s suffrage movement, might thoughtfully provoke judges. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 18 OF 100
THE AMERICAN IDEAL SPEECH
Oh Say Can You Speak Almost all judges have a patriotic streak, especially in the unending aftermath of September 11. These synopses therefore include outlines for two different speech types meant to embody or reference American ideals. Consider first a speech about sweeping themes, such as the melting pot, the frontier, the American dream, equal opportunity, discovery, the hunt for Bin Laden, the pursuit of happiness, the quest for liberty—any American concept that we can trace from the founding of our country to the present day. It is meant to uplift through its faith in the American character and in the enduring spirit of our collective dream. The introduction can be personal or abstract, but—whatever its subject—it must combine optimism with the sense that the speech is about to do great things. It must draw the judges away from their seats and into the necessary broader perspective. The following is the entire body of an American Ideal speech that won a gold medal and a perfect score, and that was written and presented by the silver medalist scholastic Decathlete at the national level. The introduction is tight and draws the judges’ attention with a strong verb—not just a listen to me but a do as I say. The body begins with a broad flourish—in this instance, the American frontier—and then spreads out over more areas. The conclusion recalls essential themes before closing with a more personal perspective. Appropriate quotes and touches of humor are present throughout. It reads like a speech, not an essay. We include the whole speech instead of excerpts so that Decathletes can inspect an example of the “finished product.” The Frontier is Forever Look! With a single command the
speaker captivates his
audience. It calls for a
graceful pointing of the whole
body—a gesture toward the
future.
“Unsettled, untapped,
untouched” is an excellent
example of powerful
repetition.
“Dedicated to discovery from
day one” and “liberty itself lay
in the land” apply alliteration
to achieve powerful rhetoric.
(point) Do you see it? Past the walls of this room, outside the margins of the city? Unsettled, untapped, untouched—it is—the frontier. The frontier. The word is magic to an American. Our nation was founded upon the premise of the frontier—dedicated to discovery from day one. “So long as there is land, there will be democracy,” said Thomas Jefferson. Liberty itself lay in the land. Some Americans, like Huck Finn, went west to satisfy their inner yearnings. Others could not resist the twin temptations of property and profit. All sought their futures—their freedom. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 19 OF 100
“Hardship and heartbreak” helps
provide alliteration and an
abstract yet compelling image:
the virgin soil broken, the
conquest of a nation.
“I beg to differ” is a short, potent
statement that counterpoints the
melodic language of the speech.
Here begins a series of concrete
evocations of the frontier—first,
social change, then science and
technology, and finally, the
imagination.
These aren’t just valid points—
they’re also exactly the kinds of
themes which intrigue and
satisfy judges.
And despite hardship and heartbreak they broke the virgin soil. They plowed the plains; they crossed the mountains. In the space of a century they “stretched from sea to shining sea.” In 1890 American historian Frederick Jackson Turner declared the frontier closed. But I beg to differ. The West was not THE frontier. It was A frontier—one of many. The frontier today is not the wilderness of untamed land. At least in America, it never really was. Countless Native Americans and Spaniard missionaries populated the “Wild West” long before we did. No, from the beginning, it was another frontier that propelled Americans forward, one still gaping open today—that of social change. Frederick Jackson Turner believed the American dream could not survive without a frontier. Sure enough, the fight to expand against prejudice and racial bias has proven as much a forge of the American character as the wilderness ever was. Here the speech turns back
toward you and me and the
common folk of the world. We all
have imaginations. We can all
stake plots along the frontiers of
our dreams.
.
A speech often benefits from a
quote, and Thoreau adds weight
and borrowed wisdom to the
speech.
Like many top speeches, it
returns to where it began,
having shared its message
about the world along the way,
so that hopefully that same spot
sounds, and feels, different.
We must obey the call of that frontier, and others—the outer limits of science and technology. One famous TV show proclaimed Space the Final Frontier. But space is just one place where “no one has gone before.” Scientists, too, are pioneers, on the fringe of the possible. Above all else heed the call of that inner frontier: your imagination. Only in the wilderness of our own wonderings that we can decide who and what we are. In 1860, Thoreau said of Americans—“I trust that our thoughts will be clearer, fresher, and more substantial than our sky, our understanding more comprehensive than our plains, our imaginings on a grander scale than our rivers and mountains and forests.” So they are, and should be. We are all pioneers. Look! (point) The frontier is calling. Go ahead. It’s not too far from here—to tomorrow. Potential Applications Of The American Ideal Speech The American Ideal speech is a good fit for the sort of student that can be at once idealistic and firmly planted on the ground. Political speeches, especially at nominating conventions and the like, are good models for this kind of approach. “There is a better tomorrow,” or, “Hope is on the way.” Whatever the phrases or the themes, they fade into a gestalt of love of country and a positive outlook on the future. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 20 OF 100
THE TECHNOLOGY SPEECH
What Goes Out When The Light Comes On? Issues such as stem cell research and global climate change make headlines on a regular basis. Everything from automobile emissions to the cloning of kittens is the stuff of debate and scrutiny. It should be no surprise, then, that a speech on a controversial or intriguing topic related to science or technology can score very well. The introduction to a technology speech must fascinate the judges. It ought either to demonstrate the importance of the subject—perhaps, as in the disappearing value speech, with an exaggerated portrait of the technology’s future—or with a vivid example of its impact today, good or bad. The following introduction, excerpted from a speech on genetic engineering, utilizes the first of these two approaches. However, it also relies on what we call a creative hook. In fact, you might say the speaker takes on a persona—showing how the different speech types can work in tandem. Captain’s Log, Stardate 2552.1. The speaker begins
by assuming the
position of a
robot—holding his
hands to his sides,
and speaking in an
absolute
monotone.
By alluding to the
world of Star Trek,
the speaker
implicitly sets up a
vision of the future.
He also adds a
necessary touch of
humor.
It is the fiftieth year of our patrol of the Neutral Zone. In a brief confrontation with Klingon warships, we lost our navigational systems and were forced to land on an unknown planet. The planet seems so strange, yet vaguely familiar. Captain’s Log, Stardate 2552.2 A most intriguing species. They all have the same appearance, the same physique, the same expression. I just can’t explain it. They lead monotonous lives, doing the same activities at the same time, in the same place, in the same manner. They are devoid of diversity and variation, almost as if they were programmed like droids. Captain’s Log, Stardate 2552.3 The speaker’s tone
must be
incredulous.
Scotty has restored the navigational systems. It can’t be possible! We’re on… Earth! With these final words the speaker shifts from a dull droid of the future to an active, breathing modern human being. His hands rise from his sides, and he begins to gesture. His voice breaks from the monotone. To accent this total transformation, the speaker steps forward and begins the main body of the speech. Observe the direct
address to the
judges—“you”—
and the use of a
triplet at the end of
the statement.
You may think this could only happen in an episode of Star Trek, but the events I have just described are not outside the realm of possibilities, even today. With genetic engineering, the manipulation of DNA to produce a desired effect, we now have the technology to grow skin from enzymes, to splice genes, and even to clone human embryos. It is this transition that ultimately makes the necessary impact. The change in aspect parallels the subject matter of the speech—how today’s diversity could give way to a species of absolute sameness. The first reaction of a judge upon hearing the introductory portion is likely to wonder, SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 21 OF 100
“Is this how he really speaks? Oh no, we have four minutes of this coming up.” The second, after the transition, is, “Wow!” The speech then moves into its delicate subject matter, carving a case out of scientific research, conjectures and quotes. The following excerpts demonstrate the movement of the speech from the diagnosis of the problem through a body of evidence that acknowledges both sides of the story and, at last, into the potential for careful progress. FIRST—THE QUOTE: Technology speeches
can draw quotes from
modern Luddites like
Rifkin and Neal Postman
As Jeremy Rifkin, President of the Foundation of Emerging Technologies, warns, “Every new technological innovation brings with it both benefits and drawbacks.” THEN—THE CONJECTURE: When this speech
was written,
Milosevic was up
there with Hitler or
Hussein in the
evildoer pantheon.
Witness the
rhetorical question
leading into the last
line of this
paragraph, which
must be spoken with
calm and conviction.
Geneticists may one day go so far as to redesign the human race. Future generations may be changed to eliminate racially or socially undesirable traits. Madmen such as Hitler and Milosevic could channel the power of gene technology to complete their goals of ethnic cleansing and to make a world as they envision it. Creating the perfect human may be a noble cause, but such goals are impossible. How can we perfect humanity when we ourselves are not perfect and all have different perspectives on what perfection means? Hitler’s version of the ideal man is different than Malcolm X’s. We must let impartial nature determine our fate. AND—THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE OPPOSITION: It is important—in any
speech which takes a
position—to admit that
another position exists,
and give it some credit,
before debunking it.
“As well as” clauses
are good for hand
motions.
It certainly cannot be denied that gene technology promises some wondrous benefits to humankind. It has enabled us to treat human diseases, to manufacture chemicals and to eliminate waste. However, those who believe genetic engineering can significantly improve the quality of our lives must also realize that the intelligent use of this new knowledge depends on society’s understanding of its potential as well as its limitations. In concluding, technology speeches often return somehow to their beginnings. Think of the best speeches as spirals pushing forward into new territory, yet still circular in form. The conclusion of this speech on genetic engineering succeeds by recalling the forced droid persona, leaving judges frightened and—if all goes well—convinced that this technology is a real issue which must be dealt with... or else... The contrast
between fact and
fiction is very
effective when
spoken in person.
Here the droid is
back in his full
soporific
monotone.
Yes, Star Trek is science fiction, but the possibility of a homogenous world in which all people are created alike by genetic engineering is rapidly becoming a fact of science. (step back and reassume robot position) Captain’s Log, Stardate 2552.1 It is the fiftieth year of our patrol of the Neutral Zoooooone..... (head goes down as robot dies out) SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 22 OF 100
Potential Applications Of The Technology Speech Many technology speeches allow you to take on a seemingly controversial topic and attack it safely. At the same time, you appear well‐informed about the future, and you avoid the generic pitfalls of tried‐and‐true politically correct speeches about topics such as the evil of prejudice and the importance of education (for details, see our “Safe Speech” synopsis later in this resource.) You will find few judges who are staunch advocates of dehumanization. Since most technologies can be seen as diminishing human independence in one form or another, few will vehemently dispute your claim. Of course, not all people may agree with all your logic. The above speech, though at points compelling, is hardly the last word on the issue. It generalizes the technology, often misapplies it, and fails to address some important rebuttals. However, what it does do is present, in four minutes, an artfully persuasive platform against certain potential consequences of genetic manipulation: homogenization of the genome, and the ensuing loss of diversity. As a general rule, aim in technology speeches not to call for a return to the stone age, but for people to realize the limitations and flip side of what appear to be innocuous advances. One more subtle topic which might make a great technology speech involves the way that cameras and photographs insidiously tamper with the way we remember events. We glance at a snapshot of ourselves on vacation and suddenly we remember something we never saw—how we looked. The same goes for home videos. Probe into the world of technology—of HDTV, CAT scans, rockets and TV dinners—and see what other topics you may find. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 23 OF 100
THE ACADEMIC SPEECH Think About It Most speeches appeal to the heart. They rely on judges to listen with their sentiments and to accept hard proof as secondary to coherent imagery. But some speeches go the other way altogether. We call them academic speeches because, in large part, they require first careful study and then an explanation of this study to a lay audience. They might involve issues or concepts—say, the value of mathematics in the modern world, or the role of teachers in society. This kind of speech cannot succeed without intellectual rapport. Speakers must convince the judges that they have attained expertise in the given subject matter and that they are vitally interested in it. If a judge happens to share that interest—as often happens—the circumstances are ideal. If a judge has no interest in it, only an effective presentation can redeem the speaker. The disadvantage of the Academic Speech is that it can become dull for both the listener and the speaker, who must practice it time and again. There is less acting and thus less room for improvement. And there is always the fear that the academic speech will turn into an essay. Before choosing an academic outline for an idea, consider whether another format would fit it better. A speech on the value of teaching could be transformed into something more personal. A speech on the application of mathematics to the real world could be turned upside‐down into something humorous. Most ideas can be brought into a more individual, creative context. But there will always be those speeches which are best suited for the academic approach—an analysis, for instance, of deontology as an ethical system. The following excerpts come from this kind of speech, written in 1993 to urge the inclusion of Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience as a document of freedom in a year when the Super Quiz outline on “the documents of freedom” overlooked it. The speech won several gold medals and a place in the national speech showcase. To deliver it properly requires a flexible voice but not much showmanship. There are few if any one‐two punches. The exposition, describing the history of civil disobedience, shows what can be and has been done with Thoreau’s philosophy. The thrust of the argument shows that we ought to return to this philosophy in order to accomplish necessary goals in today’s world. Though it may be relatively muted, the academic speech must include a tangible message—if not a call to action, at least a reason for why it is being delivered in the first place. Thus, the introduction of this particular speech type tends to be short and direct, as it is in the speech that follows: The intro assumes
judges will accept that
Super Quiz treated the
Documents of
Freedom. By citing
important people
influenced by Thoreau,
the speaker
establishes his
importance.
It has been our privilege as Academic Decathletes to study nineteen carefully‐selected Documents of Freedom. However, I feel that one document of freedom was overlooked—the work of a great man, with great ideas. That document is none other than Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, first published in 1849. This remarkable essay inspired the pacifist philosophies of Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Junior, of Nelson Mandela and Aung San Suu Kyi. It is an essay that has a powerful impact on the history of our world. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 24 OF 100
Note that imagery is entirely absent; this introduction can succeed not because of its compelling language or vibrant ideas, but because it wraps the subject in a familiar context—that of the Academic Decathlon. The body of an academic speech usually outlines different aspects of the subject matter. Because there is no real issue involved, the presented evidence must not be so much persuasive as it is intriguing. The only thing of which you must persuade your judges is that your subject is worth considering. Examples from the real world are a must, along with historical context: The speaker
gestures toward
himself as he says
“within each of us.”
He must be
absolutely sincere—
in order to calm the
judges should they
realize that he is
advocating anarchy.
Gandhi is another
one of those
examples certain to
evoke your judge’s
admiration.
And here we have
Hitler—of course.
This section can be
powerful if delivered
carefully.
MLK Jr. quotes are
worth their weight in
medals. The last
sentence is
alliterative.
Thoreau urges us to do what we feel is right. In a government ruled only by majority, laws are often passed that conflict with that inborn sense of right and wrong within each of us. History has proven that law and justice do not always coincide—some laws are inherently unjust. As voluntary citizens of our nations, we have the power—the right—to ignore those unjust laws. Mohandas Gandhi took his words to heart and, in 1919, called for the people of India to begin a campaign of non‐violent civil disobedience against their British oppressors, culminating in the non‐payment of taxes. Though arrested, imprisoned, and persecuted, Gandhi and his followers never compromised their beliefs. During World War II, Adolf Hitler invaded and conquered the European nation of Denmark. Many Danes, unwilling to tolerate Hitler’s demands for cultural extermination, joined in a resistance movement founded on the principles set forth in Civil Disobedience. These rebels, up against the greatest evil that mankind has ever known, turned to Thoreau for comfort and guidance. Perhaps Martin Luther King, Junior, put it best when he said—“The teachings of Thoreau are more alive today than ever before.” From the very beginning, in all his demonstrations, King fully embraced the philosophy of Henry David Thoreau: that peaceful protest produces peaceful change. This body has summarized Thoreau’s key ideas related to civil disobedience and examined them from a historical perspective. The King quote is an oft‐used and always‐effective rhetorical tool, as all judges respect him. The good minister left behind a trove of valuable commentary. The speech now turns to the present day– Here we move closer
to a call to action. The
speaker’s tone should
change accordingly—
becoming more
urgent while
remaining thoughtful.
In today’s world, where individuality seems to have lost its meaning altogether and politicians are labeled corrupt more often than not, perhaps it is time to return to the premise behind Civil Disobedience: that democratic government, based upon the rule of the majority, is not always based upon the rule of right. We must once again let our hearts decide what is right and what is wrong—not our leaders, our peers, or our television sets. It continues to elaborate on what we ought to do with our newfound understanding of Thoreau, then concludes on a triumphant note– SPEECH RESOURCE
The phrase “a far
stronger force for
good” calls for a
strident tone and
direct hand motions.
The melodrama of
the ending require
genuine emotion.
Don’t let these big
words sound hollow.
PAGE 25 OF 100
Indeed, the conscience of mankind is a far stronger force for good than all the laws passed by all the governments in human history. Let us no longer waste our time bickering over the details of laws set in stone centuries ago by men who did what they felt was right—let us instead come together and form new laws, based upon what we feel is right. For Thoreau’s words echo endlessly down the corridors of time. They speak to the human soul with strength and resolution of freedom for the individual—and of a government, yet to be founded, that will bear the fruits of liberty for all mankind. This conclusion has drawn together the higher‐level ramifications of the academic subject (though it has not critically examined the proposal to form new laws, which is nearly absurd in today’s fragmented political world.) The message differs with every academic subject. All that matters is that the message, whether clear or complicated, be there in one form or another. Potential Applications Of The Academic Speech You may wish to attempt a speech topic similar to the one above, by finding a perspective on climatology left out of the Resource Guide (in 2007) and arguing that it should have been included. In our guest showcase, we include the full text of a very intellectual speech on the subject of infinity. Here, we excerpt its introduction, to demonstrate that even the most intellectual of speeches—one, in fact, which later grows almost entirely incomprehensible to the non‐mathematician—can still incorporate vivid imagery: The speech begins
in a low, pensive
tone, with an image
that intrigues, like
something out of
Contact—and then
begins to consider
really big questions
about the universe.
Many an evening I step outside in the darkness and gaze heavenward in wonder. I do not gasp at the enormity or brilliant fire of the countless stars, but at the countlessness itself. All the wonder and awe of a lifetime can be summed up in one word: infinity. A billion minds have pondered the same questions to little avail. What is the fundamental nature of infinity? Can it be understood? Infinity describes the property of being without end, without definite position or scope, but what exactly is it? If this introduction has achieved its purpose, it should have piqued your interest enough for you to flip forward and read the rest of it later in this Resource—even if doing so required a little exaggeration along the way. After all, have a billion minds truly pondered infinity? The academic speech is versatile. To win with it, make the most of that versatility—combine passion, humor and history under an interesting intellectual roof. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 26 OF 100
THE AMERICAN PATRIOT SPEECH
Red, White And You This synopsis resembles the one described for the American Ideal. However, the patriotic speech is more personal: it must convey a message about being American—what it means and how we can improve our country. You can’t just list American accomplishments with a concluding salute to American greatness. The challenge is to balance patriotic praise with forward‐looking criticism. A key kind of phrase: there is room for progress, there is room for change. For instance, there remain poor people in America despite our economic prosperity. Whatever our military might, there is still the threat of untold devastation lurking in terrorist hands. Perhaps, a speaker might suggest, the next great American battle ought to be for world peace. There is room for significant variety and vigor in the American Patriot speech. A good way to open a patriotic speech is with a uniquely American hook. Consider those classic red, white and blue phrases—“of the people, by the people, for the people”—“Give me liberty or give me death!”—“The flag was still there!”—“Ask not what your country can do for you”—and so forth. The following excerpts demonstrate this technique. The Decathlete presenting the speech—
who won first place with it in the national speech showcase—lifts his hand to his heart and gazes at the American flag found in nearly any classroom, then begins5: A beautiful, simple
opening.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, in– But he breaks off the pledge at indivisible. And then he proceeds, judges hooked, into the thrust of his speech, that we have let go of the ideals of tolerance and opportunity that gave our nation birth: The speaker, Steve,
choreographed each
word of his speech
to a hand motion:
sometimes gentle,
sometimes dramatic,
always precise.
As Americans, we have been taught to recite this symbol of the American character ever since preschool. As three year‐old children, we hardly knew what the words meant. As thirteen year‐old adolescents, we understood what the words meant but we did not care. Today, we have abandoned the pledge of allegiance, and consequently we have forgotten what it means to be an American. So—the judges wonder—what does it mean to be an American? This implied question‐and‐answer technique allows a smooth transition. The strength of this
paragraph is in the
repetition of key
phrasing, the
resounding declaration
that America is not a
place but a people, and
a vision. “Causes” and
“Compels” and
“Empowers” are all
powerful verbs.
Our country was founded on the premise that we are all created equal, and deserve the right to live freely. While that country eventually became the United States, the premise became known as America. America is not the country we live in, it is the spirit of its people. America causes us to seek justice and equality, America compels us to satisfy our desire for a better life. America empowered the original American to resist tyranny, and the contemporary American to fight unjust oppression. America remains unified by this ideology, whatever our racial differences, ethnic diversities and sexual inequities. At his coach’s suggestion, the speaker changed his introduction into a broken pledge of allegiance only a few weeks before competition. It allowed him to conclude with the rest of the pledge, adding unity. 5
SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 27 OF 100
This is the perfect time to enter examples of the American ideology. This particular speaker chooses to quote a powerful poem and then to offer two anecdotes, one light‐hearted, the other serious, about diversity: Notice that even this
line from the Statue of
Liberty uses a triplet.
Also observe the
subtle introduction of
a simple statistic to
strengthen the
argument. The last
sentence is a real-life
example (again in
triplet form) that drives
home the message.
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” These words inscribed on the Statue of Liberty have brought more than 150 ethnicities to the United States in 2 centuries. Today, we are ethnically the most diverse nation in the world. Where else in the world can Taco Bell, McDonald’s, Viva la Pasta and the Plum Tree Express form the four corners of an intersection? Where else in the world could a conservative Italian American, a moderate white woman, and a liberal African American sit on the Supreme court, all trying to seek justice? Observe that the speaker moved from the problem—that we have abandoned the pledge of allegiance and forgotten what it means to be an American—to our nation’s great success: its diversity. These paragraphs praise the United States. They show what we have accomplished, and hint at what remains to be done. Now, the speech moves into the difficulty we face as Americans today: The word
“constitutively” is
extremely evocative
of our nation and its
tradition.
Real-life examples
pepper the speech
with authentic
relevancy and
tangible truths.
This is a beautiful
image—especially
combined with
interwoven fingers.
The United States is a society that views diversity as a constitutively positive force. We stand as a social experiment which, if successful, will be a model for the rest of the world. However, the experiment of America has not yet resulted in complete harmony. The civil unrest a few years ago across the United States demonstrates our inability to resolve our racial differences. Skinheads have plotted to assassinate key minority figures. Anti‐Semitism and hate crimes are once again on the rise. There is obviously room for improvement, room for progress, room for change. The United States must become a tapestry, made of threads of black, brown, yellow, red and white. Woven together, we stand as one fabric, while each individual thread displays its own color, contributing to the beauty of the work. Speeches cannot become much more vibrant than this. The image is enticing and accurate. The repetition of key words in the prior sentence—“room for ___, room for ____, room for ____” delivers a one‐two‐three punch—indeed, another triplet! Now the speaker has outlined our nation’s past successes and failures. To complete the chain of logic and observation, he focuses on the future: Stephen’s voice always
broke when he said the
words “and fight to
eliminate each other?”
His words were so
heartfelt. The evocation of
“a country on a hill”
recalls the very roots of
our country in Puritan
times.
We must turn the United States into the America we envision. Failure to do so will cause catastrophic consequences. Continuing on our present path, will we become another Yugoslavia? Yugoslavia? Where Serbs and Bosnians have claimed we cannot live together, and fight to eliminate each other? Yugoslavia? Where the term ethnic cleansing is official national policy? Or will we become like the Middle East, where Moslems and Jews fight over religious principles? SPEECH RESOURCE
Here, the speaker poses a
challenge to the judges—
and they have no choice
but to accept.
PAGE 28 OF 100
The United States stands as a country on a hill, an experiment scrutinized by the eyes of the world. We stand as a testing ground where we will determine whether America or Yugoslavia will prevail in the United States. If we act as Americans, we will not only succeed as a nation but prove to the world that everyone can peacefully coexist. If we act as Yugoslavians, however, then the experiment of unity in diversity fails, sending a message to nationalists, bigots, and religious zealots around the world stating that their practices are not only acceptable, but inevitable. The speech could end here. But the best speeches possess that final flourish. Recall that conclusions should return to the themes of the introduction. What better way to close this patriotic speech than for the speaker to place his hand on his heart once more, face that flag, and in a faltering voice, finish: ...indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 29 OF 100
THE PERSONAL SPEECH Listen To Me The personal speech need not be sentimental, though it often is. What kind of idea would succeed as a personal speech? Consider a student whose experience on the Decathlon has caused a significant change in his or her life. Someone who has faced ethnic or religious discrimination, or who has survived a terrible loss and learned to deal with it—these all lend themselves to the crafting of a personal speech that tugs at the heartstrings. One year, half the performances at the national speech showcase fit this description. Unlike those involving personas, the personal speech must emerge from the speaker’s own most intimate experiences. This means that above all else the speech must be plausible—and it must not be over the top. There can be no doubt that the recounted life story is a true one. The speaker’s integrity must be unquestionable. A student missing a finger has an easy time proving it to the judges. Someone discussing a meaningful vacation that altered his worldview faces a much harder task coming off as more than just melodramatic. A Decathlete who suffers from “the giggles” or simply looks evasive—nervous, sweaty, or too cold, too distant—cannot carry this kind of speech. The speaker needs to strike a proper balance between sentiment and maturity. Certain experiences have taught the speaker a lesson worth repeating. Now the speaker must make that lesson clear to an audience of judges. Consider the following introduction. It shocks the judges to attention. The beginning may not
be wholly intelligible to
all, but the speaker is
definitely making a
statement. The judges
are compelled to listen.
Yo Wassup Yʹall! Lilʹ Putu up in this junt. Yeah jus getnit crunk up in here fa sho. Just wanna say a little bit about what be going down in this hezee fasheeze my neezee, and Iʹm gonna tell you one thing I learned in my liz‐ife. Any speech needs a “hook” to draw in the listeners, but a personal speech perhaps more urgently—
because something needs to make a given individual relevant to the judges in an unexpected way. Judges will have already heard plenty of “I am the child of two cultures” and “Last summer I journeyed to my family’s homeland and found my roots” speeches. By starting in Ebonics, this speaker is able to overcome that. It’s far more daring than your typical introduction. The speaker is
challenging the judges.
This is what was meant
in the introductory
guidelines about
making your speech a
little hard on your
listeners.
By now, the judge may
have guessed the
explanation—this is the
riskiest point in the
speech.
Maybe if you were honest, you’d admit that the way I just spoke did not shock you that much. But if I were honest, I would tell you that it took me weeks of practice just to perfect those few lines of Ebonics. Bonjour, je m’appelle Ngofeen et je veux vous dire que j’ai appris que tout le monde n’est pas vraiment comme il apparaît. Confused now? How about this? Mu ke monikaka mpila yankaka na mutindu ya mu ke tubaka. Yo ke pesaka bantu mwavanga mingi. Okay, let me explain. I am a multicultural, eclectic, a potpourri of languages, manners, and styles. I have been raised in the United States with an African heritage and French‐speaking parents. In one of my cultures, it’s rude to call SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 30 OF 100
The speaker prevents
the judges from being
let down by offering a
charming anecdote
about his brother. A
personal speech
usually needs to make
you a likeable person.
my older brother by his name, or to give an older person anything with my left hand. In the American part of my culture, my brother couldn’t care less what I call him. And most older people would be grateful for any respect from a younger person. Standards vary from place to place. What one group considers decent and right, another finds offensive. This anecdote achieves
two things: it makes
judges sad, or even
ashamed, and it
mentions that the
speaker is churchgoing.
Given how religious our
country is today, that
can seldom hurt.
Growing up, for every kid, is a challenge. Finding a place to fit in or a group that will accept you is always the highest priority. Many of us even define the concept of being “well‐adjusted” by how successfully we interact with others. I have come to understand this all too well. Last summer, as my church youth group stopped for lunch at a rural restaurant, I found out what it feels like not to be accepted. I don’t know if it was because I was a different race from everyone else, but I do know that the waiter provided a seat for everyone at the table, but me. As I moved to get an empty seat from an empty table nearby, I was scolded by the words of the manager and by the eyes of other patrons. It was very clear that I was not wanted there. I had to struggle not to let it hurt me personally. At times when people shy away from me in a dark parking lot or suspect me of dishonesty, I can only conclude that it’s because of the way I look. I so much want to be accepted for who I am, for what I have accomplished, and for how I treat my fellow man. Yes, as humans, we have a tendency to believe that anything different from us can never be as good. Just because a speech
is personal does not
allow it to neglect hard
evidence—statistics,
quotes, well-known
events. Its body should
emphasize that the
speaker’s experience
represents something
broader than
autobiography—that
they have shared in and
learned from something
more universal. Here,
alluding to Beethoven
accomplishes that.
It also makes sure the
speaker’s realization is
grounded in something
other than fairy tale like
realization of his own
worth. Even with it, the
speech risks being too
“easy”—suddenly the
speaker is cured of his
problem. Watch out for
this “deus ex machine”
solution in your
speeches.
Says the speaker: I
wanted the closing to
be powerful, but still a
little lighthearted. So I
ended up with the
Ebonics: DAWG! I am
an American. Note that
as with many other
speeches, it circles
back to its beginning: in
this case, the Ebonics.
Science, however, teaches us differently. All throughout nature it’s evident that the more dissimilar a community of animals is, the stronger it is. Strength comes through diversity and such should be the case with our world. Instead of fearing our differences, we should grow to appreciate them. Our own bodies are amazing creations simply because of the variety of their individual parts. I am sure you see the point. If we were all the same, there would never be progress. Over two hundred years ago in Europe, doctors debated the termination of a woman’s pregnancy. The father had syphilis, and the mother had tuberculosis. This baby was destined to be born abnormal by any standards. But, because the decision was made to allow this “abnormal” child to live, we now have the greatest symphonies the world has ever heard. Beethoven was not normal, by any stretch of the imagination, but neither was his contribution to our world. The differences that distinguish me from you, I have come to appreciate, and I no longer struggle with attempting to look like one group or to talk like another. Mono ke ngolo, Mono ke mpila mingi. Mono ke Americain. Je suis fort. Je suis divers. Je suis américain. I am strong. I am diverse. And Dawg, I am an American! SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 31 OF 100
Potential Applications of the Personal Speech What makes a personal speech special is its intimate internal reality. If you wish to act out another role, try a persona speech instead. Personal speeches tend to have their tragic elements, focusing on the struggle with death, disease, poverty and disaster. The children of parents who have suffered from and even died of cancer often recount their realizations about relationships and mortality. Those with handicapped siblings speak of learning to love and defend those who lack love from society at large. Those who have built shelters for homeless families, or delivered toys to their children, can emerge as humbly heroic. Those who are going blind or losing control of their legs can speak to their struggle. And, again, personal speeches need not be restrained to the sad or tear‐jerking. You might speak of your most positive role model, or describe your place on the family tree. Ultimately, though, if you can avoid it, don’t give a personal speech unless you can make it more than just another story about overcoming tragedy or hardship. The speech included above did this through its sense of humor and skillful organization, forcing the judges to experience a first impression in a speech about first impressions more subtly than by just saying something like, “Look at me. I’m fat.” Funny personal speeches—on height, on irrational fears—have an opportunity to beyond pathos into the truly memorable and feel‐good. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 32 OF 100
THE SAFE SPEECH
Bad Things are Bad Even more so than those criticizing technology, some speeches are best characterized as inoffensive—so secure that no judge can argue against them. At DemiDec, we call these safe, or politically correct. Topics might include the need for more money in education, the monstrosity of rape, the destructive power of drugs, the equality of men and women, the value of understanding other cultures, or—as in the following excerpts from a gold medal winning speech—the evils of prejudice. To succeed the safe speech must be given in a strident tone of voice by a confident speaker. Delivery counts tremendously here—as do the unexpected little touches, the creative examples and anecdotes. The introduction can be a creative image—a painting, for instance, of a school that can afford neither textbooks nor desks—or it can be more straightforward. Sometimes, as in the following example of an introduction from a gold medal winning speech, the blunt angle can work. The first two lines
must be spoken with
all the authority of a
fourth-grade teacher
declaring students
must eat from all four
food groups.
The speaker must
emphasize the
horribleness of 250
hate groups.
Prejudice is not
inherent? Many
would argue this
point—but the
speaker slips it in
quickly and securely.
Everyone but everyone is in some way prejudiced. There are no two ways about it. By definition, prejudice is an opinion, usually unfavorable, formed without regard to available evidence, about some particular person or group. Throughout the ages, prejudice has existed as part of mankind and sadly enough, it exists today as much ever. There are currently over 250 documented hate groups in the USA. Everyone has at some time held some kind of prejudice, be it intentional or accidental, racial, religious or sexual. However, because prejudice is not an inherent quality of the human character, it can and must be fought. The first step in alleviating our prejudices is acknowledging that everyone has them. This introduction is concise. The speaker devotes no time to establishing an image of suffering victims or relating experiences from her own life. Such tactics might be effective, but, here, they are not essential. If the speaker comes off as gung‐ho and certain, then her one line—everyone but everyone is prejudiced—is enough. It’s tough to contradict. But even the safe speech cannot just cite problems. It must attempt to solve them. Here, the speaker suggests that “the first step” to ending prejudice is “acknowledging” it. Early on, she has given the judges hope for a solution. She does not bother answering the inevitable question: if prejudice is not inherent, why does everyone but everyone have prejudices? And never mind that everyone but everyone actually means no one at all—logical language lapses of this sort are easy to overlook in oral delivery. The body of the speech should then provide a structured analysis of the problem. The three‐point structure employed in many impromptus is a natural here. In this case, the introduction already outlines three types of prejudice: racial, religious and sexual. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 33 OF 100
FIRST—RACIAL: The speaker should be
careful—certain judges, if
racist, may disagree with
her—but as long as she
doesn’t sound accusatory,
she should do fine.
The most explicit example of this case appears in the United States, namely, by the white majority against the black minority. The cruelties performed against the blacks during their enslavement and for decades afterwards are atrocious. Discrimination against blacks continues today. SECOND—SEXUAL: The advantage of a
politically correct speech:
What is truly meant by the
phrase “women are equal
to men”? The point is just
accepted, carte blanche.
There are many men and women who still do not believe that women are equal to men. Times have changed, but how does one explain that the current median full time income for women is ten thousand dollars less than that for men? THIRD—RELIGIOUS: Hitler returns. Convenient
evil in a neat little package.
Consider how much better
“attempted to exterminate”
sounds than “tried to
exterminate.”
In the past, religious prejudice has led to the most severe consequences: genocide. In the 1930s, Adolf Hitler attempted to exterminate the Jewish people. No matter what the president of Iran may think, Hitler murdered more than six million Jews and decimated the lives and families of countless others, their religion reason enough to have them destroyed. Any speech which details historical circumstances must somehow link the past to the present, showing that yesterday’s troubles are still today’s: A Neo‐Nazi resurgence is plaguing Germany at this very moment. All politically correct speeches should include this broad range of detailed examples. This speaker directly incorporates statistical evidence like the number of murdered Jews and median income. She also alludes to Adolf Hitler—a valuable and safe move. Hussein may be a martyr to some, but Hitler is fairly hideous across the board, except maybe to Neo‐Nazis and certain skinheads, or to the president of Iran who insists there was no Holocaust (a worthy speech subject there, perhaps.) Despite this clever use of examples, this speaker still runs the risk of unoriginality. Nothing she has said hasn’t been said before. It is in the conclusion that she displays her ultimate creative thought—
a touching parable about self‐understanding. Without it, the speech would be a recitation of the politically correct; with it, the speech reaches insightful heights. The speaker should shift to
storytelling mode—
widening their eyes, and
softening their tone.
The last line must be
spoken with absolute
strength and conviction.
Upon entering the Simon Wiesenthel Museum of Tolerance in Southern California, you are asked to contemplate your perception of tolerance. You are then led to two large adjacent doors, one labeled prejudiced, the other non‐prejudiced. You are instructed to decide which one of these two adjectives describes you best and go through the corresponding door. However, there is a catch. Those choosing the non‐prejudiced door have a slight difficulty. The door does not open. The outline of the safe speech might therefore read as follows: SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 34 OF 100
9 A creative or blunt introduction—one that rings true for the judges. 9 A body with a precise, point‐by‐point structure, incorporating a wide array of examples. 9 A conclusion that returns to the introduction or—better yet—presents an original, thought‐provoking, heart‐tugging anecdote. No matter how exhausted the topic of a safe speech might appear, there always remains room for a bit of spark and personality. Potential Applications Of the Safe Speech Consider using the politically correct speech if you can speak in a fiery tone, but lack the inclination to argue a controversy or to inspire your listeners with evocations of their American heritage. If you find everyone agreeing with your topic, you’ve probably stumbled into a safe speech. In that case, be careful. Remember to score big with something so politically correct, you must do more than consider the issue. You must add to its generic appeal with creative hooks, insightful examples, and imaginative anecdotes. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 35 OF 100
THE METAPHORICAL SPEECH
Like (Or As) A Gold Medal Some speeches that compare two unlike things in unexpected yet thought‐provoking ways. One student proposed that we might learn about teen behavior by considering the hidden lives of lost socks—and she pulled it off by maintaining a sober tone despite the seeming frivolity of her theme. Another suggested we learn about life, diversity and expectation by considering the way that we shop for watermelons, pounding them one at a time for ripeness and flavor. These metaphorical speeches can be refreshing, though they risk becoming too metaphorical, confusing the judges or, worse, boring them. If you attempt one, make sure the metaphor is original, and the subject to which you’re drawing a comparison a relevant and accessible one. DemiDec’s poetry resource writer, Esther Tsai, even went so far as to once deliver her speech based almost verbatim on a poem she had written earlier in the year. The full text of this poem follows: Esther modifies this
poem for delivery as a
speech by prefacing it
with a charming
anecdote about she has
always longed to visit
France, and how at
night she sometimes
converses with the
Mona Lisa. Then she
leaps into the full text
as reproduced here.
The italicized sections
are spoken by the Mona
Lisa. Each time the
conversation shifts,
Esther very deliberately
switches tone and facial
expression to indicate
that she is assuming a
different persona.
The Mona Lisa takes on
the aspect of an oracle,
able to deliver wise
pronouncements that
don’t always make
complete sense.
Famous paintings are
allowed to do this.
Bonjour! Mona Lisa, How good it is to see you again. How do you do on this lovely day? Assez bien, merci beaucoup. Et toi, ma cherie? Oh, well enough, I suppose, Though there has been a question That tickles the feathers In the back of my mind. May I ask you? Please do. Very well. Will you please tell me why you smile? Have you ever seen moonlight upon water, Or the evening shadows of a tree and its leaves Fluttering like banners from countries above On the green of the grass? Do you, too, not smile in spite of yourself, Without quite knowing why, yet you do Because it is right? Does not the smile rise up from your heart Like a song that has lain there Since Creation? Yes, of course. Many times. SPEECH RESOURCE
This section—about
smiling—is especially
endearing. It conveys
the speaker’s
personality. When
you’re writing a speech,
try to inject something
of yourself into it.
Esther manipulates her
tone for “young girls in
springtime falling in
love” to evoke the spirit
of childhood romance;
the judge would need to
have a heart of stone
not to remember with a
flutter his or her own
childhood, and nod
appreciatively.
Here the judge says,
“Ah! The moral of the
speech.”
The judge may not
agree with this, or even
understand it, but can
anyone argue against
the evidently joyful
spirit behind it?
PAGE 36 OF 100
But my smiles last mere seconds. A minute‐smile is a rare smile, And I don’t think I’ve ever smiled An hour, and definitely not for days. While you have smiled for centuries – (Smiles patiently) You must have seen so much more joy Than anyone else, but didn’t you cry When your loved ones, and even yourself, When all that you knew eventually died In times lost in past – And yet you smiled. I did. You’ve seen the world for so very long, Seen ships leap for joy as they sighted dry land, Seen panicked children during tests Suddenly remember what they’d thought they forgot, And scientists stumble on light in the darkness, And young girls in springtime falling in love – That must have made you smile very much. Yes. What lovely memories you bring to me. But you must also have seen very many Soldiers who fell for no reason at all Than a foolish war was being fought By stubborn Parliaments and governments; And very many children who were hungry and thirsty And without gifts during Christmas; And very many men and women that fled from love While claiming they fell out of love. Why didn’t you weep for them? (Surprised) But I did. But you didn’t! You smiled the whole time! All through their misery, You smiled. I did. Then how? How did you weep Without ceasing to smile? My dear, confused child. A smile is not a physical quality. It is imperative that you remember that. I shall try my best to remember. A true smile is a sign of joy. One must always be joyful, No matter how unhappy One might happen to be. You can shed tears of sadness, SPEECH RESOURCE
More wisdom from the
Mona Lisa. Again, it’s
still slightly enigmatic.
If we had one
suggestion for how to
improve this speech, it
would be to make the
Mona Lisa a tad less
cryptic.
Here the conversation
shifts back and forth
more and more quickly,
but even without
Esther’s different
portrayals of the two
personas, the words
themselves make it
clear who is speaking
and when.
An optimistic ending—
an uplifting one, even.
The speaker smiles and
the average judge can
hardly help but the
same.
PAGE 37 OF 100
Rain tears of rage, Even plop great big puddles Of darkest despair. At times you must do so. But never must you cease to rejoice. And never will you cease to smile. But it’s too hard. I can’t do that. I never said you could. Then how? – There are a great many things
That you do out of need And not out of strength. Remember that, too. But you could. No. I couldn’t. But I did. There are galaxies of difference Between the two, you must know. I think I understand a little. That will suffice. And if you could – If you did smile For your immortal life span, Perhaps I can too, For this very short while. (Smiles) Applications Of The Metaphorical Speech If you’d like to dare something a little different, try your hand at this kind of speech. It can be fun to deliver, and is less risky than, say, an attempt at comedy—because unless you pick an exceptionally poor metaphor, the judges are bound to give you some degree of poetic license. Thus, the keys for you will be first to choose a unique and meaningful metaphor and then to present it with a balance of playfulness and intensity. Also, you’ll run the risk of unfulfilled build‐up. Since many speeches begin with metaphors or imagery and then branch into something else, judges may expect you at any given moment to depart from your metaphor into the main body of your speech. You’ll need to make it clear early on that the metaphor is your speech, not just an extended introduction. Indeed, be careful not to convey that impression by mistake (say, by suddenly shifting gears in the last half‐minute.) Possible metaphors—life is a box with a peephole in it, any given fairy tale, talking to a tree… the opportunities are boundless and quirky. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 38 OF 100
THE HUMOROUS SPEECH The Other Side There’s nothing harder in the prepared speech event than being funny—at least, on purpose. The humorous speech is the riskiest of all. If it’s not funny enough, it falls flat. If it’s all jokes, judges will ignore it. In this conflict of extremes the easiest answer is often to give up and write another sort of speech with some humorous overtones (and, indeed, a bit of humor helps nearly any speech.) It takes courage (or overconfidence) to attempt what for all intents and purposes becomes a comic monologue. Memorable examples, an ironic tone and a straight face must convince judges that the speech is as worthwhile as it is funny. Decathletes cannot ask “why the chicken crossed the road” unless their answer reflects a fresh response—not to mention some research into the issue. The speech needs to touch on a subject the judges will understand. More than in any other synopsis, the speech must not read like an essay. The best humorous speeches sound spontaneous even after endless practice. One Decathlete whose comic speech on tabloids won the national speech showcase chose to improvise certain spots every time he gave it. He claimed that the ad lib component kept him alert and alive. The following is a speech by Monica Schettler, a recent national champion who consistently scored top marks in the subjective events. The beginning doesn’t
seem out of the
ordinary. Here we go
again, think the judges,
another speech about
looking at the world
more positively.
Throughout our lives, we have heard that every cloud has a silver lining. Itʹs a shame that in todayʹs world we so seldom seek out that silver lining in each cloud. Instead we prefer to focus on the so‐called problems of this earth. I think we desperately need to take a step back so that we might stop being so close‐
minded and start looking at the world in a new way. A humorous speech is often strengthened by an early, unexpected twist that signals to the judges that all is not as it seems. At “But why?” the
speaker looks
perplexed. Then, as she
rattles off the reasons
why child labor is good,
the judges can laugh
immediately, or think
seriously for a bit—
either way, they’ll be
entertained once they
realize the speech is not
really endorsing child
labor. If a judge says,
“Whoa, she had a
point,” all the better.
Child labor. It has a negative connotation because weʹve imposed some sort of great evil on the practice—but why? Child labor stimulates developing economies, eliminates the need for parents to pay for expensive day care, and helps children to learn the skills in life they will need later on! Kids are agile creatures, able to perform some pretty difficult tasks. They can fit into small spaces and their high energy levels can only help improve productivity. Children can even supply the labor necessary to replace the aging baby boomer population if only we allow them. Of course there are drawbacks when it comes to employing the physically weak and overworked—but why dwell on them? Be careful not to exhaust a humorous topic. Even the best jokes and anecdotes can only be told so many times. At a recent national speech showcase, a Decathlete appeared to break with this rule by speaking the whole time about zombies—but even he switched between subtopics, such as “what are zombies” and “how does one defend against zombies?” In this speech, rather than spend the whole time talking about child labor, this speaker now moves on to another variation on her theme of silver linings. SPEECH RESOURCE
This speech includes a
number of opportunities
for theatrical delivery.
“Whoa, partner, slow
down,” allows the
speaker to gesture a
“hold your horses”
motion with her
hands—and “the Man”
is a perfect opportunity
to do the “quote sign”
with her fingers.
Building such moments
into the text makes it
much easier to script in
effortless (and, in this
case, amusing) hand
motions.
By referring to the GI
Bill, the speaker shows
that she is not just
funny, but historically
informed. You don’t
want to be taken as a
lightweight just
because you’re funny.
PAGE 39 OF 100
What about pollution? Pollution is such a daunting topic that some people label the whole phenomenon bad and move on. But I say—whoa, partner, slow down! Pollution isnʹt as bad as the Man makes it seem. Pollution has been shown to contribute to the Greenhouse Effect, and with the Greenhouse Effect, everybody wins! As environmental toxins deplete the ozone layer, UV rays are allowed to penetrate our atmosphere warming our cold and mundane existence. How can that be bad? And as the polar ice caps continue to melt, ocean front property is becoming more accessible than ever! Sure people may become highly susceptible to skin cancer, but that just means they will have to buy more sunscreen, and we all know the sunscreen market could use a boom in revenue. Bring on the pollution! And letʹs not forget about how wonderful war can be. Wars are great for the economy! Wars snap our young men and women into shape and give them a sense of purpose. The GI Bill is a wonderful way to give American youth an unparalleled educational opportunity, and how can we misconstrue education as a bad thing? Anyone preaching peace over war must really despise freedom and the many things our country stands for. Perhaps these nay‐sayers should focus on the positive aspects of war rather than all the negatives. Dictatorships donʹt get enough credit, either. We desperately need decisive leadership! Have you ever tried working on a group project with a bunch of air heads? Nothing gets done! We need one strong voice to drown out the others with an opinion thatʹs always right. Todayʹs world is such a busy place. Voting is simply too time consuming and stressful. Letʹs do ourselves a favor and leave politics up to these stern, assertive leaders. Like any speech, a humorous one often loops back to its introduction in order to conclude on a graceful note. The best speeches, though, don’t just repeat their openings; they allude to the new insights afforded during the body of the speech. This speaker does that perfectly in her last line, bringing us back not just to silver linings but to the ozone layer issues she referenced earlier. Imagine the devoted
expression of love to
ultraviolet radiation that
the speaker can assume
as she speaks the last
line.
We as a people are seriously lacking a balanced perspective. These are only a few examples of how we so callously misjudge our world. If only we appreciated more of the positives in life and pursued those silver linings, each day would seem that much brighter, even if itʹs only that darn hole in the ozone layer letting in more of the sunʹs loving UV rays. Potential Applications of the Humorous Speech A humorous speaker can make this kind of speech win gold; anyone else will suffer. Topics to consider include anything wacky or unexpected. One of our favorites at the 2001 nationals was on the value of bad pictures. A few years earlier, DemiDec team member Jesse Vigil spoke about the value of speaking—to yourself—and faked singing in the shower in the national speech showcase. You’ll see a pattern here: Jesse, like the bad picture speech and Monica with her silver linings, praised something a lot of people criticize. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 40 OF 100
THE ALTERNATE HISTORY SPEECH But That’s Not How It Happened This is a relatively niche category of speech that explores other ways that history might have gone. Often, alternate history speeches focus on the United States, enabling a patriotic element, but they can also span the ancient world and even pop culture. For instance, what if Rome had never fallen? What if Turkey had remained Christian? What if Madonna had married Michael Jackson? On the American historical front, what if Lincoln had survived his assassination? What if the French had never sold us the Louisiana Territory? The idea is not simply to entertain the judge with a piece of speculative fiction, but to illuminate certain aspects of our own world by contrasting it to another world that never was. An alternate history of the civil rights movement in which Rosa Parks had never started a bus boycott might emphasize the importance of individual actors in the battle against discrimination—
and it might also end with the promising observation that in the end, equality would still have triumphed by some other means. Consider this excerpt from the introduction to a very unorthodox alternate history speech: Rather than simply tell the
change in history, the
speaker begins by
showing something that
could never have
happened in our own
world.
In 1502, Queen Isabella of Spain hosted an unusual dinner for a guest from abroad. In his honor, the chefs forewent their traditional cuisine of paella and saffron‐seasoned chicken, opting instead to make something from his homeland: Peking duck. The Dr. Who allusion is
probably a bad idea—only
a fan would get it, and
there aren’t that many on
this side of the Pond.
Yes, that guest wasn’t Dr. Who; he was an emissary from Beijing. He chatted with the queen about opportunities for trade. And seated at her side was the man who had made it all possible: Christopher Columbus… This is the pivotal point
where the change in
history is introduced.
<dramatic pause>…who in 1492 set sail for Asia, and arrived there nine weeks later suffering a bit of scurvy but otherwise in good health. Of course, this never happened. In real life, Columbus stumbled into islands off the coast of America and never found China or India or any of the fabled Eastern kingdoms. But what if America hadn’t been in the way, because there had been no America at all? Picture a slightly smaller Earth with only ocean between Europe and Asia. That is the Earth that this other Columbus set out to explore.
Of course, as a speaker you must do more than simply paint an alternate world. You must also explain to your judges why an examination of this other world is relevant. Hook them with the surprise and then intrigue them with thoughtful analysis. The speech stays
politically correct and
considers the impact on
something intellectual:
philosophy and art.
Consider the philosophical developments that might have occurred had the thinkers of the European enlightenment mingled freely with their Asian counterparts. Is it possible that the concept of “Western Civilization” would have disappeared in favor of a more global perspective, East and West united by the trade winds? SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 41 OF 100
In your conclusion, try to remind your judges of the delightful possibilities inherent in the forum of alternate history: The speech concludes
with a look at someone
else who would have been
impacted by the
disappearance of the
American continents.
In that other 1512, an Italian man died quietly on the streets of Seville. To the end of his days he felt he had been robbed of something, a great destiny that would have allowed his name to echo throughout history. <pensive sigh> Amerigo Vespucci was survived by two sons and a daughter. Potential Applications of the Alternate History Speech There are different levels of alternate history, including but by no means limited to the following: ♦ Alternate histories in which a person made a single different decision from which all other changes stemmed. ♦ Alternate histories in which people made the same decisions, but outcomes were different due to chance alone. ♦ Alternate histories in which outside variables intervened: disasters, disease, the discovery of gold. ♦ Alternate histories in which the world itself was different (as in the speech above.) A scientifically‐savvy speaker might even want to undertake a speech about a universe in which basic physical constants—such as the force of gravity or the value of pi—are altered slightly. What would the ramifications be on human life? SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 42 OF 100
THE CONTROVERSIAL SPEECH
You v. Them Sometimes the best speeches strike a nerve. They are the Showtime and HBO speeches, compared to your usual network fare—not safe and certainly not conventional. Just as one Showtime series describes a suburban mother who deals marijuana, controversial speeches take stands at best debatable and at worst detestable. If, like Weeds, they can be a little funny too—all the better. These speeches must be delivered in a secure but not self‐righteous tone. You should sound neither wishy‐washy nor like a zealot; you must show you can understand and answer the opposition. Wherever there is controversy there is more than one side to an issue. A good speech admits there is another side but setting it aside, usually by explaining why it lacks compelling support. The best controversial speeches find a way to make the opposition realize their right answer may not be as right as they thought. Consider the following excerpt from the introduction to a speech on affirmative action: Like any other speech,
a controversial one may
effectively open with an
image. In this case, a
hanging provides
ample opportunity for
hand movements.
Once, he tore a woman open from head to toe. Then he raped her daughter. Now, his last meal is scrambled eggs. His last words are unintelligible. His last act is to close his eyes. Then the noose tightens. The platform opens. The man falls. His hands convulse toward his neck. The man dies. We have just witnessed something extraordinary: an execution. A nod at “justice” helps
prevent the speech
from sounding
sarcastic.
At “Some would have
you believe” the
position of the speaker
begins to clarify: he will
be in favor of what he
just described.
It takes other forms. Electric chairs. Lethal injections. It takes other names. Capital punishment. Justice. Some would have you believe that it isn’t justice at all: that those who take life should not lose their own as a consequence, that the punisher becomes as bad as the punished. Nonsense. Those who kill, deserve to die. Those who rape, deserve to die. Those who rape and kill children, deserve worse. But death will have to do. It may not be kind. It may not even be Christian. But provided it is dispatched with certainty of guilt, it cannot be wrong. If the above introduction had waited any longer before taking a clear stand, the judges might have grown impatient. But once it took its stand, it did so boldly. Controversial speeches must be thoughtful but never ambivalent; if you cannot be sure of your stance, then give a different sort of speech. This speech’s opening image was risky because it described the execution before taking a position, but it biased the image in its favor by first explaining why the man was being executed. If it had simply begun with the execution, some judges might have thought it was a protest speech. Now, the speaker must now assemble a case for capital punishment. The speaker’s approach should focus on the program’s merits while displaying a willingness to consider necessary changes. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 43 OF 100
] FIRST—THE REASONS: The speaker shows that
he has studied the
subject, then drops a
statistic to bolster his
case. Statistics are
important elements of
controversial speeches;
many judges respect
them, even though they
can certainly be
twisted—or invented.
Quotes are also helpful.
Three justifications are commonly given for capital punishment. The first is retribution. This most obvious reason is also the most ancient: it dates back to codes of the ancient Middle East: an eye for an eye, a life for a life. The second is deterrence. Statistics demonstrate that in areas where capital punishment is enforced, the murder rate falls by over 30%. People are less likely to commit murder if they know the consequences are grave. The third reason is to bring a measure of peace to those who have been bereaved. As the wife of murder victim Kenny Johnson said in 2003, “His death doesn’t bring my husband back. But it helps me to move on.” A controversial speech needs to cite evidence on its own behalf. This one leverages a statistic and a quote. Most likely, to truly persuade a judge, a speech needs to go even further. SECOND—CONSIDERING THE OPPOSITION: The “It’s true that”
clause signals that the
speaker is about to give
some ground to the
opposition.
It’s true that it would be horrendously unjust for a man to die for a crime he did not commit. Last year, DNA testing cleared a man who had been on Death Row for over ten years; it turned out he had been wrongly convicted. But now that we have DNA testing available from the start, such wrongful convictions should become less common. And when there is reasonable doubt, remember that a jury cannot legally convict someone of a capital crime. It is also true that certain minority groups are convicted of these crimes more often than others. To the extent that this is caused by injustices in the legal system, we must revisit that system and guarantee equal representation for all. But there may be other causes for crimes in certain communities, such as economic pressure or broken families. We need to attend to these problems. But we cannot pardon the murderers. There is no excuse for crimes that take life—that rip flesh. The speaker has touched on many aspects of this delicate issue. The main body of a controversial speech should also try to include applicable quotes, statistics, and personal experiences. The conclusion of a controversial speech must emphasize the speaker’s sincerity and faith. It must be empathetic enough not to anger the judges but assertive enough to show that the issue is no longer in doubt. There is an answer to this controversy—not everyone may agree with it, but the speaker knows what that answer is. The conclusion is
short, sincere—no
theatrics.
I will never celebrate a death. There should be no rush to judgment. But we cannot be a society that allows the taking of life with equanimity. Those sentences of gruesome crimes, who slaughter Amish schoolchildren, who rape their daughters and drown their sons, should not sap social resources sitting in prisons for decades at a time. An eye for an eye. A life for a life. A criminal, for an innocent. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 44 OF 100
Before embarking on a controversial speech, remember the potential problems. No matter how respectfully it treats the opposition, the speech will make enemies. The margin between disaster and a medal is a tight one. But when the controversial speech finds its speaker and its audience, it can be great, a speech that can open minds and change them. Potential Applications of the Controversial Speech Other controversial topics include affirmative action, the war in Iraq, welfare, abortion, gun control and euthanasia—no matter which side you take! Very daring Decathletes may want to take on religious dogma, argue for a more sensitive war on terrorism, make a case for communism, or revisit one or another of the recent election controversies—but remember that these topics come at great risk of offending a judge. If you do attempt the controversial speech, remember to balance your own beliefs with a willingness to consider, answer and even incorporate counterarguments. One way to do this: every time a practice judge suggests that they disagreed with (or were angered by) one of your points, see if you can include an answer to their dispute in your next rewrite. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 45 OF 100
THE SATIRICAL SPEECH Here’s To You, Mr. Colbert You may want to deliver a speech that makes a statement and dismantles the opposition through mockery or exaggeration—in other words, through satire. Such speeches demand precise writing and delivery; they risk running into judges that don’t get them. Consider: there are some viewers who think Stephen Colbert is actually a right‐wing extremist. At the same time, to be successful, the speech has to be written so that someone could take it seriously and never realize the joke was on (or at least lost on) him or her. Here’s the opening to one that is at once over the top and more subtle than most. It attacks intelligent design by proposing that if intelligent design is to be taught in schools, the theory of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) ought to be taught as well. Judges don’t need to know that FSM is a real movement for the speech to succeed. I’ve underlined some of the words that the speaker, Dean Schaffer, would usually emphasize. The speaker opened by
lifting his hand toward
the heavens like a
biblical prophet and
uttering, “In the
beginning…”
Most satirical speeches
begin by introducing
the main exaggeration
(there’s usually some
kind of exaggeration.)
Some, speeches,
however, might begin
by sounding
conventional, then
slowly build up to
absurdity.
When you write your
speech, try to inject
moments that scream
for certain
movements—such as,
in this one, the
description of the flying
spaghetti monster.
In the beginning, the Flying Spaghetti Monster created life, and it was tasty. Or at least that’s how Oregon State University graduate and self‐
proclaimed prophet Robert Henderson believes it happened. Last December, Henderson proposed a new alternative to Darwin’s evolutionary theory—Flying Spaghetti Monsterism. Much like the similar theory of Intelligent Design, Monsterism posits that life forms are far too sophisticated to have developed from random evolutionary chance alone; some omnipotent force must have controlled the process. According to the gospel of Monsterism, all life was created by the Spaghetti Monster, an invisible being consisting of two eyes, two meatballs, and quote‐unquote “noodly appendages.” Monsterism is rapidly gaining widespread support, despite claims that the theory is sacrilegious. But, nonsense! If anything, Monsterism is nothing less than “sacridelicious.” Monsterism’s appetizing beliefs, which include a lake of marinara sauce in its vision of heaven, have satiated my hunger for evolutionary truth, and I am now a proud follower of Monsterism, a Pastafarian. It’s hard to praise this speech too much. Look at the puns: sacridelicious, pastafarian. In an earlier version, Dean said sacridelicious without first using the term sacrilegious. Some judges appeared confused, so he adapted the text to clarify his word play. This is exactly what you should do when practicing your speeches with judges: make changes based on their reactions (not just based on their feedback.) A satirical speech needs to be shaped like a normal speech. A normal speech would proceed from the introduction to the marshalling of evidence. Dean does this without ever losing the humorous subtext (watch out for the Italian‐Americans) or the opportunities for hand motions (imagine him drawing the helix of DNA with is fingertip.) SPEECH RESOURCE
The voice variations that
this speech allows are so
much fun—try it.
Notice the careful
grammar: “as compelling
as that of intelligent
design.” Many students
would have just written,
“as compelling as
intelligent design.”
Here, the speaker can
emphasize “clear proof”
to make fun of the way
that certain religious
zealots find equally clear
proof of divine
intervention in nature.
Note that he risks
offending religious
judges—most satirical
speeches, if they are to
have a point, risk
offending someone.
PAGE 46 OF 100
But in addition to its surface appeal, Monsterism is supported by evidence at least as compelling as that of Intelligent Design, evidence that has convinced not only Italian‐Americans but Americans of all descents to convert from Darwinism to Monsterism. Consider, for example, the human eye. Both Monsterism and Intelligent Design point out that the eye is far too complicated to be the result of natural selection, as Darwin proposed. Monsterism is a response to this gaping scientific hole: the Flying Spaghetti Monster’s Noodly Appendages are both delicate and maneuverable, perfect for the molding of life. Over time, the Spaghetti Monster used His Noodles to meticulously and lovingly sculpt what has become the eye. Evidence of His design can even be seen in the blueprint of life itself: DNA. The structure of the DNA molecule is an intricate double helix, but have you ever examined a single strand of DNA? Bears a striking resemblance to spaghetti, doesn’t it? But while DNA may not be as tasty as pasta, this similarity is clear proof of both the Spaghetti Monster’s existence and His active role in shaping anatomical structure. Having marshaled its pseudo‐evidence, a satirical speech can take on its target directly. By now, speakers should feel free to reveal they are having a good time with the speech—it can help ensure the speech succeeds—but should try not to laugh at their own words: an earnest speaker makes the speech more amusing. Remember, also, that a satirical speech need not be funny, though it often is, especially to those who find sarcasm funny. Note that this speech
pretends to attack one
thing—Darwinism—
when it is really
attacking Intelligent
Design. Satirical
speeches can never be
taken at face value, but
they must have a face
value.
Much like proponents of Intelligent Design, Pastafarians demand that all scientifically viable theories of evolution be taught in public schools—not just Darwin’s. After all, Darwin’s theory is only a theory, not proven fact. Intelligent Design, Darwinism, and Monsterism, therefore, must all receive equal time and equal treatment in the classroom. Thousands of believers, including members of the Kansas and Pennsylvania School Boards, have already signed prophet Henderson’s online petition in support of Monsterism’s educational inclusion. To deny a theory with such scientific and social support a place in our schools would surely be ridiculous. A satirical speech must end as if it were a real speech; indeed, to a certain degree it can even mock the way most speeches conclude, with their sweeping statements and deliberate returns to their introductions. Words like surely and
angry, crackpot are
meant to ridicule people
who truly say such
things: who dismiss
established science as
phony and claim
intelligent design
belongs in schools on
the basis of its scientific
merit.
Unfortunately, I suspect that angry, crackpot scientists with backwards and conservative views will soon emerge to deny the validity and obvious truth of Monsterism, much as they have already tried to discredit Intelligent Design. These heretics will surely attempt to deprive our youth of the balanced education and diet they deserve. We must act now if we are to preserve the educational equality and integrity of this country. I implore you—we must protect the freedom to choose Flying Spaghetti Monsterism for the children of America. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 47 OF 100
Potential Applications of the Satirical Speech Name your controversy and you can probably find a way to satirize the opposition. Note that you’re satirizing an opposing point of view, not the subject itself. It’s hard to satirize euthanasia, but it’s easier, if not very clever, to satirize its practitioners by endorsing a doctor who goes around prescribing it to people who stubbed their toes. When you write a satirical speech, ask yourself who your enemy is, and then try to side with them in some way. The speech above does this deftly by setting up a natural ally for intelligent design—allowing him to critique it in outlandish ways without directly stomping on the toes of potentially religiously conservative listeners. The speech is meant to make them ask, “How can I not support the Flying Spaghetti Monster if its evidence is just as solid as that for my own belief system?” If you can make judges experience that kind of thought, your satire has succeeded. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 48 OF 100
Preparing Your Prepared Speech BY ROBERT PAZORNIK
The speech competition: my preferred event. Admittedly, the fact that it is my favorite may stem from the fact that it was in this event that I achieved the highest degree of success. In the 1998 competition, I scored 1000 at the Orange County level, and then I repeated with another perfect 1000 at the California State competition. Now, as I hang up my decathlon belt, I’d like to pass my years of accumulated know‐how on to you. I sincerely hope that you will find the following information useful; the proceeding material contains the tactics and secrets I used and taught my team over the last few years. Contrary to popular opinion, you do not have to be a master of public speaking skills to successfully earn a medal in the USAD speech event. One of the most spurious misconceptions in the entire Academic Decathlon is that the speech competition is essentially decided before it begins; in other words, only professional speakers who have served a minimum of four years on the local speech and debate team will earn a place on the podium. Such is definitely not the case. For those Decathletes who quiver at the mere mention of speaking in the presence of others, worry not. While three and a half minutes may seem a horror now, after months of practice, those painful minutes will begin to feel like seconds. Just remember to keep an open mind about speaking, and don’t shut out the idea that you might actually have some fun doing it. The speech competition is not your enemy. It is not an assignment that you will have a mere week or two for which to prepare. You will have up to an entire TEN MONTHS to ready yourself; ten months in which to write, rehearse, repeat, and ramble your speech off to colleagues, teammates, parents, teachers, friends—essentially, to anyone who will listen. Below, you will find a type of guide to writing your speech—think of it as you would any other timetable or schedule. But remember that there is no need to rush yourself. Think all the elements through carefully, and plan your strategies accordingly. 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Choose a topic Write a rough draft Revise for structure Revise for clarity / fluidity Revise for time Insert body language, spoken elements, etc. Practice Step 1: The Topical Rainforest No, we’re not talking coral reefs, but choosing a topic is probably the most difficult step in speech preparation. It is important to select a topic that interests you, but more importantly, one that interests the judges. Of course, this is not to say that you should choose a topic solely because you believe the judges will appreciate it (i.e. “The unparalleled merits of USAD speech judges and their altruistic contributions to humanity”). Conversely, this is also not to say that you should choose your topic for the sole reason that you might find it personally amusing (i.e. “The many creative uses of bubblegum and denture cream as common adhesives”). SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 49 OF 100
Though there are several types of topics from which to choose, it has been my personal experience that the best speeches are those based on a current or pressing social issue. Some good examples of this are as follows: •
•
•
•
The dangers of genetic engineering The obsession of American society with violence The increasing apathy of society towards the environment The second‐rate status of American education Regarding the list above, one might be quick to note that nearly all these topics relate to some kind of problem facing society. These are all good topics because they all allow the speaker to become emotional without demanding stories of personal woe. Also, while all of the above do relate to pertinent social issues, none are sensitive to the degree that they would be likely to raise bias in the judging panel. It is no coincidence that topics such as abortion, capital punishment, and affirmative action are conspicuously absent from the list. These sensitive issues are difficult to speak about since they are so vulnerable to subjective interpretation. It is very important when examining these topics in a speech that you talk about both sides of the issue. That is, when discussing the downfall of American education, remember to touch on the steps being taken to correct the problem; by taking a two‐sided approach, you can avoid sounding like a doomsayer without losing the emotion or power that is so vital to a solid speech. On this note, please be advised that while a two‐sided speech is beneficial in some respects, do not take this approach to an extreme. In fact, judges are not so quick to be moved by a speaker who carefully examines the pros and cons of an issue without taking a firm stand one way or the other. Example: a speech based on racial tensions in America. In the first half, the speaker outlines the general problems of race relations in the United States; in the latter half, the speaker discusses the programs and positive efforts currently and historically being taken to correct the problems. To conclude, the speaker ends with the proverbial line “…but will the solutions correct the problems? Only time will tell…” First of all, never end with “only time will tell…” This line, besides being the most overused and hackneyed closer in the entire high school speech industry, is a great way to tell the judges that you are trying to end your speech the easy way without making any conscious or educated decisions; this is obviously not the impression you should be attempting to convey. More importantly though, a speech like this is only mediocre because it is emblematic of a fence‐sitter. That is, on the whole, a speech which equally examines both sides of an issue and comes to no rational conclusions is a poor one because it lacks direction. Above all, you want your speech to have direction; from the opening line, you want to grab your audience and lead them to a premeditated destination. It is difficult, however, to have a definite direction to your speech if you attempt to undertake a two‐
sided strategy. Are you confused yet? Don’t be. Instead of striking out a pure two‐sided fence‐sitting speech, instead go for a hybrid “one and a half sided” speech. An example based on the previously discussed ‘Racial tensions in America:’ first, spend the majority of your time examining the problems associated with racial tensions. Then, briefly outline the steps being taken to correct the problems. After touching on the solutions, quickly follow with substantiated reasons, evidence and theories as to why the corrections will not work unless additional steps are taken. In this example, SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 50 OF 100
the new speech has a definite direction: racial tensions are too strong/too embedded in society to be corrected with little effort—more drastic steps must be taken. Thus, the speech cannot be criticized for being a one‐sided closed‐minded argument because the speaker has taken steps to recognize proposed solutions (even though he has dismissed them). In my speech on genetic engineering, I was quick to prevent myself from a four minute diatribe by touching on the positive effects of biotechnology as well as the negative ones through a brief real‐
life example. However, just after I finished explaining how cloning and gene splicing could be used to the benefit of mankind, I rapidly followed in my next thought with examples of how easily technology could be abused by destructive elements, and I continued the remainder of my speech to this end. By this method, I was able to maintain my “one and a half” sided argument and thus, maintain my strong direction, as well. A brief summary of what we’ve discussed: When choosing a topic, try to think of what might interest you if you were a judge. Nothing can hurt you more in this competition than talking for four minutes about something which those judging you could care less about. Select a topic that might raise some thoughts in the judges’ minds without sounding too controversial. Run your ideas by your coaches, teachers, and parents, and see what they think (since most judges fall under one of those three categories, you can usually gather a good idea as to whether or not the topic you have chosen is a good one). Also, keep in mind the direction in which your speech is headed. Try not to fence‐sit and attempt to use the “one and a half sided argument” approach. Always ask yourself whether your audience has a clear picture of the ideas you are trying to convey. Again, ask your comrades for advice, and don’t be opposed to changing your speech for the better. Step 2: Necessary Rough Drafts When writing your rough draft, it isn’t necessary to think about time. Simply write whatever comes to your head about your topic, and keep writing until you have about two pages typed out. Though you should try to organize your draft with a clear introduction and conclusion, don’t worry if you can’t come up with them right away. You’ll have plenty of time later to revise and rewrite. Think of this first draft as a brainstorm: just let loose all of your ideas onto paper. If you’re absolutely stuck and cannot think of a good way to jumpstart your mind, try using the following technique: First write out a list of all your ideas on the topic. Let’s say our topic is “The power of television.” Think of everything you can about the dangers, powers, advantages, and disadvantages of television and list them: 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Television has the power to change peoples’ opinions Television is rapidly turning society into a couch‐potato nation Television is destroying our children’s’ abilities to think for themselves Television has an unparalleled potential to educate Television is a metaphor for our own lives Once you have created your own list, write a paragraph under every statement. It is not important that you write a great deal about each thought—simply put your ideas on paper. Remember, this should not be incredibly difficult—don’t worry about structure. Think of the rough SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 51 OF 100
draft as a place to spill your brain. If you do encounter a great deal of difficulty in spilling it, perhaps you may have chosen a topic not suitable to your particular tastes; it’s not too late to backtrack! Go back and pick another topic if you so desire. Once you’ve found a better subject that you can sensibly discuss, then it’s time to move on to the next step. Step 3: Structural Development Revising for structure is not as difficult as it sounds. Just remember some basic guidelines. First, take into consideration what your speech will look like. You should have the following (note: this is not the only way to successfully organize your speech; it’s just a basic guideline): 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Introduction Thought 1 Thought 2 Thought 3 Conclusion First of all, a powerful introduction—it should act as an opening bookend to your topic; it is of paramount importance that the introduction do all (or at least some) of three things: 1. Provide a succinct introduction to the topic being covered 2. Be “different” 3. Transition smoothly into the opening of the main body In some cases, you might consider stepping into a “character” for your introduction. In a speech about genetic engineering, you might do your introduction as a robotic droid, which would represent the possibility of a genetically engineered master race of identical, boring people. In a speech about the environment, you might want to introduce your topic as a lumberjack or as a tree‐
hugging neo‐hippie. Just keep in mind that you want to correspond the character to the purpose of your speech; introducing a serious topic such as “Advances of cancer research in the 20th century” as an alien from another planet might be a good idea—introducing the same topic as a professional football player might not (though it could be amusing). The point of stepping into a character is to give the judges a unique feel for your topic and, above all, to set your speech apart from others. However, stepping into a character is definitely not necessary to achieve a high score. For other ideas, review the introduction techniques utilized in the sample gold medal speeches in this resource. Your first thought in the main body of your speech should be an extension of your introduction. If you have chosen to step into a character for your introduction, you should step out of it when you open your speech into the main body. Each of your thoughts should be separate, yet should also have some common link. In this, your first revision, it is not yet overly important to worry about transitions between thoughts, nor is it important to restrict or limit yourself to only three. If you believe that it is necessary to your topic to examine four or more thoughts, then by all means do so. Later, when you revise for time, you will be able to eliminate or incorporate the extraneous or superfluous topics. The conclusion should act as the second bookend to your speech. In other words, it should be somewhat of a mirror to the introduction. If you stepped into character for the introduction, it SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 52 OF 100
might be a good idea to step back into it for the conclusion. It is also important to make sure that your conclusion is not a completely new thought of its own. Make sure that it acts as a strong closer, not as a new beginning. Remember the old axiom: “Tell them what you’re going to say; say it; then tell them what you said.” Your conclusion should act as a definite close to your speech. Nothing is worse than a judge not knowing whether you have ended your speech or have taken a dramatic pause. Step 4: Clear as Crystal, Flow Like Caramel Revising for clarity is definitely a vital part of speech preparation. Getting your ideas across to the judging panel in a clear and concise method is the key to success in any competition. The first step to this revision will be to make sure that each “thought” in the main body is clearly separate from the next; make sure that one thought does not repeat another. Also, make sure that all components of your speech are headed in the same direction: if your speech topic is “The downfall of American education,” make sure that all of your ideas in the main body convey the same message—that American education is second‐rate. When you examine the positive side of American education, make sure that your audience is still aware that the education system is a long way from being fixed. In other words, you should try to avoid fence‐sitting; if your standpoint is that American education is not up to par, it is imperative that each of your thoughts be delivered with this undertone. Otherwise, your speech might appear to have little direction and will be judged accordingly. Once your ideas in the main body have been cleaned up, it’s time to work on smooth transitions. Your movements between thoughts should be, above all, smooth and coherent. Each idea, though wholly separate, should be linked to the next with clarity. Though this sounds complicated and a bit confusing, it’s actually quite simple. In general, it is a natural instinct to progress from one thought to the next by starting each with the words “firstly,” “secondly,” etc. Above all else, you must fight this impulse. Nothing reeks more of a formulated 5‐part speech than abrupt transitions. Think of your transitions as extensions of your ideas. Begin each new thought as if you were just ending the last one—here’s an example (the transition sentence is underlined): A Bad Transition—not smooth: Germ warfare, above all other weaponry, poses the greatest threat to modern society. Manufactured in over 80 nations worldwide, these powerful toxins have an unparalleled potential for destruction, as well as for the ultimate demise of mankind. Germ warfare might hold the key to national independence. History has taught us that weapons of mass destruction may actually act as bridges to economic self‐reliance and prosperity. Throughout the mid to late 20th century, the cold‐war arms race fueled the American economy to astronomical levels. Notice here how the transition between ideas is very rough; in fact, there appears to be no transition at all. The movement between ideas is sharp—not smooth. The idea of the first paragraph and the idea of the second are definitely not connected; they are delivered as though they are two separate entities altogether, and they are presented as though they have no common link. This gives the speech the appearance that it has no direction and is merely a few ideas thrown together. A better transition—smoother: SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 53 OF 100
Germ warfare, above all other weaponry, poses the greatest threat to modern society. Manufactured in over 80 nations worldwide, these powerful toxins have an unparalleled potential for destruction, as well as for the ultimate demise of mankind. But these armaments might actually hold the key to national independence. History has taught us that weapons of mass destruction may actually act as bridges to economic self‐reliance and prosperity. Throughout the mid to late 20th century, the cold‐war arms race fueled the American economy to astronomical levels. Here, the transition is somewhat smoother. Notice how the speaker does not start the second paragraph the same way as the first; this is a very good change from the original. By finding a synonym (armaments) for “germ warfare,” the speaker has smoothly progressed between thoughts in a much less caustic fashion. Try not to start each idea with the same words or phrase unless you are doing so for a desired effect; starting each paragraph the same way is awkward—it creates a rough feeling that will damage the overall impression of your speech. Also, notice how the word “But” serves to link the paragraphs. Even though it’s only one word, it acts as an effective extension of the last thought. Instead of dropping off abruptly, the speaker has now successfully connected his ideas. An excellent transition—very smooth: Germ warfare, above all other weaponry, poses the greatest threat to modern society. Manufactured in over 80 nations worldwide, these powerful toxins have an unparalleled potential for destruction, as well as for the ultimate demise of mankind. But despite this potential, these armaments might actually hold the key to national independence. History has taught us that weapons of mass destruction may actually act as bridges to economic self‐
reliance and prosperity. Throughout the mid to late 20th century, the cold‐war arms race fueled the American economy to astronomical levels. The key to this transition is restatement; in this case, the speaker has linked his ideas by briefly restating the word “potential’ from the first paragraph, while combining it with an introduction to the topic of the second paragraph. This technique makes the speech more effective than it was in the first or second examples. However, keep in mind that a long transition isn’t always better than a short one. Look at the example below: Germ warfare, above all other weaponry, poses the greatest threat to modern society. Manufactured in over 80 nations worldwide, these powerful toxins have an unparalleled potential for destruction, as well as for the ultimate demise of mankind. But regardless of their threat to modern society and their unsurpassed potential for destruction, these toxic chemicals manufactured in over 80 nations worldwide act as economic stimulants and a key to national independence. History has taught us that weapons of mass destruction may actually act as bridges to economic self‐reliance and prosperity. Throughout the mid to late 20th century, the cold‐
war arms race fueled the American economy to astronomical levels. Here, the once smooth transition has been destroyed by a tangling entrapment of repetition and overstatement. Even though the idea of the first paragraph is restated, the major problem is that the idea is restated nearly verbatim. The concept to remember is subtlety—don’t overemphasize the fact that you are making a conscious effort to make a smooth transition. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 54 OF 100
A Brief Summary Of Transitions In the example, note that the idea stressed in each of the paragraphs is different; in the first, the speaker addresses the dangers of germ warfare to the well‐being of society. In the second paragraph, the speaker discusses the advantages of destructive weaponry to the economic well‐
being of a nation. This juxtaposition of ideas is effective, and is made all the more so by a smooth transition between thoughts. Note how the first sentence of the second paragraph acts as a link between the two ideas; the first part of the sentence restates the idea of the last paragraph, and the second part of the sentence introduces the new idea to be discussed in the second paragraph. Keep in mind the fact that this is just an example; there are several other ways to successfully link thoughts in the main body. Just remember that smooth transitions play a vital role in the success of your speech. Step 5: Watchdogging The art of revision for time constraint is difficult to learn; it is even harder to teach. You will quickly find that after delivering your speech over and over again, it will become exponentially more difficult to eliminate even the simplest of sentences or shortest of syllables. The best thing to do when you have a four minute, fifteen second speech is to consult your coach and teammates: ask them what sounds best. Almost invariably, Decathletes have an ear for that which can be cut at little cost. The time you should be shooting for is 3:45. If you have a speech that goes 3:59, you should seriously consider minor revision. After delivering your speech several times, you will find that your time will fluctuate about 3 to 6 seconds in either direction, depending on the scale and composition of your audience. Even a consistent time of 3:50 might be too close for comfort. Eventually, after extensive practice, you should become comfortable with your pace and the time flaws should diminish. Use good judgment in your editing, and remember that every word, no matter how solid and beautiful, is ultimately expendable. Sacrificing a few carefully chosen words for the good of the whole is a noble endeavor worthy of a medal itself. bodybuilding Body language is a beautiful thing; it can say everything or nothing at all. More importantly, masterful or sloppy use of it can make or break your speech, so learn the art well. Below you will find a list of some basic suggested elements of body language and their purposes—think of them as icing on a well‐baked cake. If you’re not sure how to use them, practice them for a friend or teammate. At first, your movements may appear awkward and rehearsed, but don’t worry. With time and practice, they will become smooth, polished, and—believe it or not—comfortable. Walking Walking is a good way make a transition between ideas. When you are done with one of your paragraphs, taking a couple steps to the left, right, forward, etc. as you make your transition to the next thought is a good way to tell your audience that you are moving on to a new idea. As a general rule, it is not a good idea to speak for a lengthy period of time while walking unless it serves a metaphorical purpose. Keep your walking simple, brief, and rehearsed. Again, if you’re not sure whether walking is appropriate, ask your coach or teammate how it looks. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 55 OF 100
The Hand Spread When emphasizing two points at once, or two parts of a whole thought, the hand spread is a good way to tell your audience that you’re looking at both sides of an issue. Here’s how to properly execute it: first, put both hands straight at your sides, palms facing inwards. Then, as you begin to emphasize the first part of the idea bring your right hand up slowly so that it is parallel to the ground and at the same time rotate your palm so that it faces upward. When you emphasize the next part of the idea, use the same motions with the left hand (Note: do not stop talking while you move your hands). As a general rule, your hands should be about shoulders’ width apart. An example of how to use this technique follows: When I make lunch, I won’t settle for an ordinary peanut‐butter sandwich. I prefer peanut butter and jelly . In this example, the speaker should move his right hand up when he says “peanut butter” and his left hand up when he says “jelly.” The word “and” should be stressed for effect. The Fine Point Suppose you are stressing a particular detail in your speech; let us say that you are trying to emphasize the distinction between “table salt” and “iodized table salt.” Now would be the opportune time to employ the “fine point” technique. First, make an “OK” symbol with your right hand and pretend as though you are pinching a grain of sand between your thumb and forefinger. When you make your point, raise your “pinched OK” to about eye level and stress the words you are attempting to emphasize: Then again, no ordinary crystallized sodium will do; though your instinct may be to go with garden variety table salt, only iodized table salt will satisfy your needs. Notice here that the speaker should perform the fine point when he says “iodized.” Perhaps he should also intone his voice slightly when he pronounces that word in order to separate it from the rest of the sentence. The Clap No, you’re not going to applaud your own speech. The clap, in fact, is a simple and effective way to strongly emphasize a word or short phrase. The benefit of the clap is actually twofold, in that it emphatically clarifies a point and quickly grabs the attention of the audience. The clap is an exciting movement; it is especially effective at the end of an argumentative point or as an answer to a question. Note the examples: 1. At the end of a point: But the consumer should be wary of alternative medical solutions to complex medical problems. Since the days of bloodletting in medieval times, humans have often been all too eager to embrace remedies which might actually do more harm than good. To protect the health of ourselves and our loved ones, it is absolutely paramount that we act as responsible consumers, researching the reliability of non‐mainstream medical procedures. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 56 OF 100
2. Answer to a question: But are stronger gun control laws truly the answer to our nation’s horrific track record of random violence? Absolutely. Top law enforcement officials from every state in the U.S. agree that by placing increasingly strict requirements on gun possession and greater restrictions on powerful assault weapons, America can successfully lower its escalating crime rate. In both of the above cases, the hand clap should be executed as the underlined words are spoken. As you begin to say the word, raise your voice slightly and firmly clasp both hands together at about mid‐chest level in front of you. As you continue to speak, you may keep your hands clasped together and lower them to about waist level. Gradually, you can return your hands to your sides and use them to execute other motions. Rebel without a pause The pause is, perhaps, the most useful weapon a speaker can employ. It can be utilized in a variety of methods in nearly any scenario to create a dramatic, humorous, or even bizarre effect. Think of pauses as actual words themselves, and memorize where and when they belong in your speech. Browse a few of the different types of pauses and examples of their employment below: 1. The basic pause: for use in almost any situation Humor: Tofu, besides being a legitimate substitute for meat in hamburgers, can also be a healthy source of complex carbohydrates. But the greatest obstacle facing the emergence of tofu as a popular dietary supplement is quite imposing: (pause) It tastes like compost. Mild Drama: More recent efforts to curb pollution have taken their effects on a global scale; the Montreal Protocol of the 1980’s served as a virtual warning call to prevent the destruction of this planet’s most precious resource: (pause) life itself. 2. The transitory pause: for use in transition between thoughts. It should be a little longer than a basic pause and can be complemented by taking a step or two in a new direction. Transition: Tofu, besides being a legitimate substitute for meat in hamburgers, can also be a healthy source of complex carbohydrates. But the greatest obstacle facing the emergence of tofu as a popular dietary supplement is quite imposing: (pause) It tastes like compost. (transitory pause) Despite the Styrofoam‐like composition of this nourishing substance, researchers continue to make dramatic strides toward the improvement of… 3. The dramatic pause: for use when emphasizing a critical line or point. This pause should be extended and emotional, and is usually followed by more widely‐spaced words. The dramatic pause is definitely not for the meek of heart; however, it can be the most powerful tool in your speech. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 57 OF 100
Still, cancer research pushes on. Despite the threats posed by government cutbacks and combative‐minded pharmaceutical companies, the search for cures and the quest for miracles continues. Regardless of all adversity and greed surrounding what is arguably the most cutthroat industry on the planet, doctors and scientists the world over will continue to selflessly do what they’ve done for years and years: (dramatic pause) save (slight extra spacing here for emphasis) lives. Step 7: Practice Makes Professional Practice is not an option, it’s a necessity. Without it, your speech, no matter how well written or composed, will come off as a mere essay read aloud. Once you have completed your final draft, you should begin practice immediately; that means in class, at home, at the dinner table, in the shower, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. Keep in mind that for every minute you practice your speech, your score will rise considerably. Practice is the final, and perhaps the most critical step in the speech preparation process—don’t throw away all your hard work by blowing it in the final round—
you’re almost there—just hang on! Timing is everything The time period immediately after you write your final draft is the best time for you to start practicing, because the material is still fresh in your head. In fact, you might surprise yourself by recalling several lines of your text from sheer memory. Take this sign as an encouragement to stick with it. It might be a good idea for the week immediately after you finish the final draft to practice for at least half an hour per day. I personally discovered that the best times for practice are right before I go to bed and right when I wake up. Once you have practiced sufficiently for the first week, you should be able to lower your practice time to a mere five‐ten minutes a day. Just don’t get left behind! Though you have plenty of time to work on your speaking skills, it’s all too easy to let your practice slip away until the night before the competition. So take it nice and easy, but not too easy… To Memorize, Or Not To Memorize One of the most common questions asked about decathlon speeches is, “Do I have to memorize it?” The answer is unsurprising: absolutely. If you’re aiming at a place on the podium, memorization is the only way to go. For most of you, the first step before memorizing your speech will be to transfer the finished product onto note cards. The best way to do this is to use one note card per thought; your introduction should go on one card, your first thought on the next, your second on the next, your third on the next, and finally, your conclusion. The entire note card transfer process should take you about ten minutes, maybe half an hour if you opt to get fancy with the computer (which actually might be a good idea for those with less than perfect penmanship). Memorization, like any other large task, is best undertaken in steps. The best method, by far is to take your speech in chunks; first, memorize your introduction: just take your time, memorizing one line at a time and building on it. Memorize the first line, then the first and second together, then the first, second, and third together. Continue until you have memorized the entire introduction; then, repeat the introduction over and over; practice it until you can complete it without a mistake (As a side note, it’s not important to worry about memorizing pauses and body language just yet; simply SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 58 OF 100
keep in mind where movements and pauses should go—you’ll pick them up as your memorization gets stronger). Once you have adequately committed your introduction to memory, start working on your first thought. Complete the previous process of building on each line, adding one line each time a new one is memorized. Once you’ve committed the whole paragraph to memory, it’s time to practice them again. As far as a timetable is concerned, you might endeavor to undertake one paragraph per day. Once you’ve memorized two paragraphs, try to put them together. Complete the process until you’ve memorized your speech. If you follow a strict timetable and recite your lines religiously, you should have your entire three minute, forty five second speech memorized in no more than a week—that’s right—a week. If you have a strong work ethic and a desire to win, that’s all it takes. If it takes you longer, don’t fret—
remember that you have plenty of time if you start early. Once you have memorized your speech to some degree of fluidity (it’s okay to look at your cards intermittently), you should be able to slide out of speech‐rehearsal‐overdrive and ease up on your study time. As a personal rule, deliver your speech at least one time during some point in the day and one time before you go to sleep. And don’t forget to recite in the presence of teammates and coaches, who will be more than likely to offer up healthy bits of advice. Though you may opt to decline their words of wisdom, if you do hear the same comment from more than one individual (example: your coach and two teammates tell you that you speak in a monotone), it might be a good idea to give their thoughts a second thought of your own. THE BIG DAY A few words of advice: 1. No matter how well you think you have your speech memorized, bring your notecards just in case. Keep them well‐hidden. 2. If you can’t decide how to dress, it’s better to dress up than to dress down (consult the beginning of this speech resource for dressing advice) 3. Shake the judges’ hands. Introduce yourself. Wear a smile. Be friendly 4. If someone happens to barge into your test room as you are delivering your speech (it happens), fight the urge to get flustered, and continue regardless. Nothing impresses the judges more than a student who can thrive in spite of adversity. 5. No tongue rings, please. Pretty please. 6. Be confident—you’ve studied, you’ve rehearsed, you’re ready. Walk into the room with pride and walk out with your medal. Good Luck! The End Product Here are gold‐medal winning examples of speeches I have delivered and worked with—notice how many of them benefited from advice in earlier editions of this same Speech Resource. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 59 OF 100
“The Dangers of Genetic Technology” (Step into character: robotic droid—speaks with no emotion, mechanical tone) Captain’s Log: Stardate 2525.1 It is our fiftieth year of our patrol of the neutral zone. In a brief confrontation with hostile worships we lost our navigational systems and were forced to land on an unknown planet. The planet seems so strange, yet vaguely familiar. A most intriguing species. They all have the same appearance, the same physique, the same expression. They are devoid of diversity and variation, almost as if they have been programmed like droids (extended pause, move head left / right abruptly). The navigational systems have been restored…what? Please repeat…It can’t be possible….we’re on Earth?! (Step forward, out of character into dramatic tone) What is that—out there—on the horizon (point out, extend hand)….I can almost reach out and touch it, yet somehow (make hand into fist), it escapes my grasp (open hand as though releasing something, gradually lower hand back to side). That’s right, it’s the frontier—the technological (fine point) frontier. And everyday, it seems to expand at an alarming rate. But whether it expands for the benefit or detriment (hand spread) of mankind is inconsequential (flail hands out to sides), for it expands nonetheless. You may think the events I have just described to you could only happen in an episode of Star Trek. Droids? A planet where diversity is nonexistent, and every man looks and acts the same as the next (wide hand spread)? Absurd (clap and quickly spread hands apart)! But the events I have described may not be so farfetched, even by today’s standards. Imagine this scenario (both hands in front of body, as though offering something): you are a proud mother—
or father—to be…(clasp hands behind back, puff out chest slightly) as you sit in a doctor’s office one morning, you eagerly await the results of prenatal testing. The doctor enters the cold room—his face(pause, confused look on face, chest ‘unpuffs’ slightly)—unyielding. His mouth opens—his words (deep exhale)—devastating. (somber tone) Your son or daughter will be born with a debilitating disease. You embrace your spouse (hug yourself). You cry in anguish (grip hands in fists, shake in front of you)—in bitter despair. But there is a hope—it seems that a scientist has discovered the gene for this disease and it may be genetically re‐
engineered—repaired, if you will—to the benefit of your unborn child. He or she will be born healthy; your dreams and prayers have been answered, at last. Needless to say, the possibilities are endless. But what if, someday, our quest for knowledge goes too far. It might not be so farfetched for geneticists simply to redesign the entire human race. Future generations may be altered to eliminate racially or socially undesirable traits. Madmen such as Hitler and Hussein could manipulate genetic technology to finally accomplish their goals of ethnic cleansing. At last, there would be no variation in the world—we would live in a droning homogeneous society. And I (place hand over chest), for one—am frightened by this. Perhaps this fear of technology was espoused best by Albert Einstein (pause), “Intelligent use of knowledge depends on society’s understanding of its inherent dangers, as well as its potentials.” (pause) That was spoken nearly a half century ago, but it meant nothing to do with genetics, microbiology, or cloning. So what was this powerful yet dangerous technology being referred to—so detrimental that it could change the entire course of world history forever….(dramatic pause) he was referring to nuclear holocaust. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 60 OF 100
Yes, Star Trek is science fiction, and the horrors of a society devoid of diversity may be a long way off in the future. But let us consider this: perhaps it would be wise to act now on the ambitions of mankind before scientific fiction (very slow, narrow hand spread) suddenly becomes scientific fact. (step back into character) Captain’s Log, Stardate 2525.1 It is the fiftieth year of our patrol of the neutral zone. My God, what have we dooooonnne…..(drone out slowly and lower head, as though having been shut off) “The Greenhouse Defect” There. Can you hear that? (dramatic pause) It’s the sound of a tree falling. Actually, it’s the sound of millions of trees falling. It’s the sound of thousands of acres a day of tropical and lush rainforest the world over, falling to their bitter stumps, and we can’t hear them, because we’re not there. (Pause) And can you hear that? It’s another sound of silence—— it’s the sound of no one caring. What a difference a decade makes. It seems that only ten years ago, we were all wearing save the rainforest T‐
shirts, we were protesting pollution, we cared about global warming. If I remember correctly, Earth Day seemed to be a mandatory holiday in our nations’ public schools, with each student enthusiastically doing his or her part to save the world for our children. (subtle laugh) Today, we don’t wear save the rainforest shirts, we’ve somewhat lost our steam on the global warming front, and I challenge you to find a high school student that even knows what month Earth Day is in. So what happened? Where did the train of environmental soundness jump its tracks? Itʹs hard for anyone to deny that, as a society, we’ve all become a little less aware today of the environment we used to love with such undying emotional pain yesterday. So then, what happened? The environment hasn’t disappeared; the problems of deforestation and overpollution still run rampant in our ecosystems, and the temperature of the earth is still gradually rising; so why do we just not seem to care as much as we did about saving our planet as we used to? Jeremy Rifkin, a former Stanford cultural anthropologist, offers the following explanation: simply, as a society, we just…. moved on. In considering modern humanity, it is important to understand that our lives move in cycles; once we have grown tired of or feel we have exhausted one aspect or concern of our lives, in this case our worries of the environment, we simply move on to the next aspect which is most pertinent to our collective situation. In short, the selfish desires of a society are the driving forces behind what we do and do not care about. Sadly, this theory seems to portray the human race as a self‐serving group motivated only be personal interest. But like it or not, this is what we have become. As the 1980’s drew to a close, the incidence of the Gulf War did much to extinguish the flame of social concern over the environment. When the war had subsided, lawmakers, sensing the lowered enthusiasm toward the environment, essentially stopped responding to the former call for a cleaner, greener earth. The economy was on the upswing, and according to the opinion polls, no one really seemed to care, so why damage the rebounding economy by continuing to pursue the environmental standards of yesteryear? As a society, we began to move away from concerns of the environment to others. In essence, the flavor of the month had changed; and whether we admit it or not, we had failed to, or rather, cared not to realize what had happened. But still, the trees fall, emissions rise, pollution increases, and still….we aren’t there to hear it. As quickly as the environment had rapidly become everyone’s problem, with the same speed and efficiency, it has gradually SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 61 OF 100
become someone else’s. It seems now that until the bitter end, only when the evils of the world we have created finally come crashing down on us in the future will we ever realize what has happened. It has been said figuratively that Americans do not like preventive care. In other words, Americans tend to fix the problem after it has happened than attempt to prevent the problem from happening. It seems that only when Americans are slapped in the face with a dramatic problem do we ever realize that we need to do something about it. Winston Churchill once said, “A time bomb may tick for years. But only when the fuse has finally expired will people run for cover. And by then of course, it is too late to run.” There, can you hear that? (pause) Our time bomb has begun to tick as well. But is anybody listening? Hopefully, we’ll be able to hear its warnings before the time becomes too late. Because when our fuse has run out, there may just be no second chance. So, I leave you to consider this: if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does anybody really care? “Film at Eleven…” (step into character: newsroom anchorman) …and on Tuesday the foreign trade minister will make his much anticipated departure to Malaysia in order to settle the finance dispute between Fra—(pause suddenly, hand goes to ear—look quickly to right, then back to front) (excited tone) This just in—it seems that as we speak a high speed chase is in progress on the 405 freeway. We go now live to Airchopper 4 with live coverage…can you hear me Ron? The speaker is on ho—wait now, as you can see the white Honda hatchback is speeding down the highway at breakneck speed. He now appears to be changing lanes and moving onto the shoulder…Ron? Are you getting this? (Take one step forward, lower tone from excitement to somber, out of character) When… why…who…where…and how? When, why, who, where, and how did American society progress to this? To this—an era in which we find ourselves more fascinated by the violence portrayed on television than by the events of our own real lives! A time in which the evening “news” consists of a simple list of the random acts of violence that have occurred over the course of the day. So the questions stand: When, why, who where, and how did it all come to be this way? In the mid‐20th century, the television was born; but then, it was not a toy. Rather, it was considered a new medium by which people could send and receive information. It became an information revolution unto itself, a modern day miracle in its own time. Now, the average American could sit back, relax, and enjoy the news of the world as it came conveniently to him through a mystical glowing box. With the expansion of communication into the visual realm, the world was to see a new, advanced society. But then, almost too quickly, it seemed, this piece of technological equipment rapidly transformed from a tool of knowledge into a tool of destruction. Rather than aid and guide a nation, the television soon began doing much to destroy the very foundations on which it was built. (back to newsroom mode. Take one step back, put hand back on ear) Oh my God! Did you see that! In a desperate attempt to flee authorities, the suspect has crossed over onto the shoulder, swerved to avoid a minivan, and slammed at high speed into the center divider. Paramedics are now on the scene, attempting to pull bodies from the twisted wreckage. What a horrible, horrible scene. (back to speech. Take a step forward) SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 62 OF 100
But why? Why did this horrendous transformation occur and why does the bulk of modern entertainment consist of sadistic violence and bloodshed? Some claim that society as a whole has become more violent, and thus, entertainment has merely mimicked this change. “We’re just giving the people what they want to see,” is the hackneyed claim of several entertainment magnates. But rather, we should consider, is the average American asking for what he wants, or is the average American simply being told what he needs? By and by, it is no secret that the media has come to play a larger part in our everyday lives than one could ever have suspected; collectively, it would be hard to argue that in some form or another, we have not been individually influenced by the media in any aspect. However, it has rapidly become a popular modern trend to blame the media for the ills of society. Rather than blaming ourselves for the situations we create, we now turn to the irascible scapegoat of television for the monstrosities it has projected onto our lives. But is this to say that the media is not at fault in the least? Surely not. But the question of how to solve social problems should not rest solely on the back of the entertainment world. If as a society we are to ever change for the better, reform of the media is only the first step. In order to make a cognitive decision to end the violence depicted in the walks of our lives, we must staunchly refuse to be helpless spectators who simply sit back, relax, and allow life to take its course. (slow down for this part—dramatic finish) Mark Twain once told us, “Yes, ‘tis true that life is but a player’s stage, but let not the stage become the life of the players. For not even the surliest of audiences would pay to see the tragedy of their own lives.” (step back into newscast—hand in ear, etc.) A tragic, tragic end to this situation. Two bodies are now being exhumed from the wreck….(deep sigh, shake head slowly) As we view such a terrible end to this scene, we must ask ourselves how did it come to this? How did we ever allow this tragedy to happen… This is Ron Kramer, channel 4 news (head slowly drops down).
SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 63 OF 100
Improvement BY MICHAEL FOSTER KIM
Introduction: Speak to be at least third Some of the exercises below are... exotic. If you implement them, you will buzz like a bumblebee, speak to the beat of a metronome, and talk through a mouth full of marshmallows. Don’t laugh. These are serious techniques. Don’t Crumple Or Fold As a speech coach, my basic philosophy has always been, “Don’t teach a speech. Teach speaking.” This idea has many important consequences, the most important of which I have integrated into this resource. It deviates significantly from the way that most Academic Decathlon programs treat these subjective events. The traditional method would be what I call the “top‐down” approach, in which the events (speech and interview) are broken down into the largest units possible. That is to say, you practice the entire speech or entire interview at a time, over and over again. Unfortunately, these large units are very unwieldy and it is difficult to pick up a skill out of context and apply it elsewhere. I like to approach matters bottom‐up, working on individual skills before emphasizing the entire speech at once. Thus, the methods employed here depend on building awareness and control of •
•
•
Body Hands Eyes •
•
•
Voice Speech Psyche
The Body For our purposes, the body includes the entire body except the hands and eyes. As a coaching preference, I discourage ambulatory speaking (walking and talking.) For me, stability is a major concern—though occasional steps back and forward can be effective transitions. You may be offered a podium. If you choose this option, you should still stand independently—podiums are designed to hold papers, not people. Don’t lean against them. Speakers should not sway back and forth or look unbalanced. Adopt a good posture. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 64 OF 100
THE IDEAL POSTURE While every person will have their own variation, I recommend starting with both feet shoulder‐width apart, shoulders and hips square, weight distributed evenly on both feet, head held comfortably high, no slouching or hunching over. Think “perfect posture.” Be aware of how gravity pulls on your frame. You should feel very balanced and grounded. Chances are that this posture is not natural to you, in which case you should practice it as often as possible. This includes in your everyday conversation, as you wait in line at the supermarket, in between classes—
in short, at every available moment. When speaking, the entire body can be used as a tool for emphasis. If you imagine that your legs and trunk form a single line, by slightly tilting or twisting this line, you can administer an intended effect upon your audience. THE LINE EXERCISE Try this: while in “perfect posture” adjust your line in the following ways: Tilt: forward, forward‐left, forward‐right. Rear and lateral tilts are very rarely used. Twist: rotate‐left, rotate right. And finally try combinations. The key is to maintain stability. Practice these body movements until they become very natural and comfortable. Here are a few no‐
no’s and exercises to help correct them. “CHAIRS” EXERCISE There will always be the one speaker on the team who needs to be corralled in order to stop them from rocking back and forth or distributing their weight unevenly. Try placing chairs directly at their sides and rear to give them visceral feedback. Speakers will become more aware of their rocking or fidgeting and stop the behavior. It also emphasizes the importance of solid posture. Another possibility—
place a mirror behind the judges. It can be excruciating but effective. CIRCULAR EYE CONTACT AND POSTURE CONTROL EXERCISE Standing in a circle, each speaker should try to deliver a speech (usually an impromptu or their life story) and attempt to control eye contact and posture as they do so. Effective use of the “line” should also be emphasized. Here the goal is again to build awareness by watching others and practicing two skills meant to work in an integrated fashion. The Hands This includes hand gestures, where to put your hands, and the all‐important handshake. The goal is to develop natural, comfortable looking gestures combined with anti‐fidget control. The first thing to establish is a good handshake. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 65 OF 100
THE HANDSHAKE Ideally, it will be firm and gentle shake. This is not the time to show off extraordinary grip strength. Don’t be wet, weak or quick. THE GAUNTLET Have the entire team (and volunteers if you can find them) line up and have each member proceed down the entire gauntlet, introducing him or herself and shaking hands. At the end of the gauntlet, open each person’s technique up for general critique. Try to offer constructive thoughts coupled with concrete examples. Having dispensed with the introductory handshake, one must determine a “natural” hand position. Of course this will vary for each person but it shouldn’t be too difficult to determine. NATURAL HAND POSITION FINDER Everybody on the team should raise their hands to their face, with their palms facing inward. Keeping the palms facing the same way, lift hands above the head level. At this point, relax your arms and drop them casually to belly level. The degree of unfolding of the hands represents what position the hands should be in. Most people range from a gentle crescent moon, to a slightly bent spearhead. Convince yourself that your hands are not ugly. This should be relatively easy to do—just think of your sensual fingers, and of your luminous wrists. There’s no reason to hide them behind your back, stuff them into your pockets, or fidget with them. Folding them gently in front of your body is just fine as a neutral position. Now the key is to develop natural arm movements to accompany the hands. The best way to diagnose and treat potential problems with arm movements is to deliver a speech in front of an audience instructed to focus on these motions, in front of a mirror where you can instantly catch your own mistakes, or via videotape. We do not urge you to begin by memorizing hand motions for your speech. At first, let your hands speak for themselves. As you grow more comfortable with them, you will gradually learn a series of motions to complement your prepared speech. If you try memorizing them too soon, rather than letting them originate over time, you run the risk of appearing wooden. A problem evident in many nervous speakers is the tendency to fidget. Usually one hand demonstrates this far more than the other. While this may seem uncontrollable, it can be helped. TOBY Once upon a time, a young woman kept running her right hand through her hair whenever she gave her speech. Her coach came up with a solution. He gave her an elephant‐shaped piggy bank to hold in her right hand. After clunking herself in the head three times, she was cured. They named the piggy bank “Toby.” You don’t need to find an elephant‐shaped object—just find anything that hurts if it hits your head. Through a combination of embarrassment and pain, you’ll learn how to keep an overactive hand at ease. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 66 OF 100
The Eyes Noting eye contact and motion has long been a hobby of mine. If you ask somebody to spell a particularly difficult word, chances are you’ll see their eyes flit to a corner of their visual range. The answer isn’t printed there, but they do it anyways. This same phenomenon occurs during speeches and impromptus. Often speakers will stare at the ground, ceiling, or off into outer space. Everywhere, except at the audience’s eyes. But eye contact establishes familiarity, a sense of mutual humanity. Think of it as a way of “reeling in” your judges—practice pulling at them through your eyes. TRACKER Without a mirror, it is impossible to get instant feedback on your eye‐contact—and even then, the experience is not authentic. To offset this, assign a member of your audience to track your eye contact during impromptus. This person will be personally responsible for reporting all of your quirks and bad habits. Use this feedback to become more aware of what your instincts direct you to look at. Also, each person in the audience should be the recipient of meaningful eye contact. After practices, query everyone as to how much and what quality of eye contact they received. Ask them what percentage of your attention each one feels was devoted exclusively to him or her. If you’re managing eye contact effectively, the number should add up to more than 100%. Watch out for mechanized eye movements. These include lawn sprinkler eye‐contact (imagine a sprinkler as it moves from left‐to‐right and then right‐to‐left…) and flash bulb eye‐contact (imagine standing in front of many cameras, and trying to glance at each flash as it goes off in a random sequence…). The goal is first to be comfortable giving eye contact, then being able to control it to hook your audience. If you think you’re losing one of your judges, give them a little more attention. But don’t be dismayed if your judge decides to ignore your attempts at eye‐contact, just take it in stride and continue speaking naturally. Remember, some judges have lazy or wandering eyes. Now go back and try the circular control “tracker” exercise again, this time focusing on giving everybody (except the two people adjacent to you) eye contact. Practice using your eyes as a drawing, pulling factor in your speeches. The Voice In this section, I focus on the sounds coming out of your nose and mouth. There are several skills related to “voice” to develop with serious exercises—don’t underestimate their importance because of how awkward they may feel. The qualities of voice that we will work on are clear enunciation and articulation, appropriate projection, modulation, and, if needed, the softening of an accent. The key to proper enunciation and articulation is in the mouth and tongue. This means you ought to open your mouth wide when you speak. Practice this in an exaggerated manner, so that when you begin to speak, you will have the correct mouth position without much thought. Consider slowing down each word and feeling the mechanism of your tongue, mouth and throat as they work together to form each word. Finally when you think you’re ready, test the limits of your enunciation and articulation with this exercise. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 67 OF 100
FUZZY BUNNIES Once reserved only for slumber parties or camp outs, this exercise will now be used to test the limits of your enunciation and articulation. Begin by saying, “fuzzy bunny” or another phrase without any marshmallows. Then try it again with a marshmallow in your mouth. After successfully completing this run, proceed with more and more marshmallows, until your voice is sufficiently garbled to be deemed unintelligible. A small warning here: do not choke on the marshmallows. DemiDec will not be held at fault for a student choking on a marshmallow. Once we learn to speak with clarity, we must work on the ability to project our words appropriately. I’ve heard many soft‐spoken people with exquisite voices that are never discovered because of this problem. The key to good projection is breathing correctly. Now you might ask, if air goes in and air goes out, isn’t that good enough? Not quite. There are actually three major types of breathing. “Clavicular” breathing occurs when the chest rises toward the clavicle. “Sternal” breathing occurs when one lifts one’s chest toward the sternum. And, finally, we have “diaphragmatic” breathing—which occurs whenever one uses the diaphragm to intake air. In projection control, we work on our diaphragmatic breathing. Try drawing air into your gut during a deep breath. Placing your hand on your stomach, you should be able to feel your breathing as your hand rises and falls. SCREAMS AND YELLS The difference between these two terms is dependent on the voice projection mechanism. Using a vowel (usually, “Ahhhh”) project it LOUD and sustain it. Maintain proper posture, diaphragmatic breathing and do not stress your vocal cords. When you feel a strain in your vocal cords, you are probably screaming instead of yelling. You should be able to yell indefinitely without causing hoarseness or discomfort. Extend this exercise by shouting sentences instead of vowels. Remember to focus on breathing, posture, and enunciation. Everybody knows somebody who speaks in a flat line. This monotone is not very lively, nor does it lend itself to much expressive power. The key here is modulation. A cappella singers have a great exercise for developing and using your entire range. As you can probably guess from the source, this exercise requires that you sing. Yes, some of you are tone deaf. Others of you have tried to sing and met with, shall we say, less than a rousing reception. But don’t let that stop you from practicing modulation. This resource wasn’t written for the glee club or chorus. It’s for Decathletes. BUZZ LIKE A BUMBLE BEE This exercise focuses on tone modulation, enunciation, projection, and as always posture. Either individually or in teams, sing words or phrases containing three syllables (usually words like “bumble‐bee,” or “Peter Pan”) following this progression. If you have access to a piano it might help. <going up> C E D F E G F A G B A C’ B D C’ <going down> E’ C’ D’ B C’ A B G A F G E F D C ‘ denotes the same note an octave higher. Focus on the changes in pitch, and enunciating the last syllable (it tends to get swallowed in the process of singing.) SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 68 OF 100
Very few people will admit to giving a student a lower score because of a perceived accent. But the truth of the matter is the judges will take note either consciously or subconsciously. The important thing—if you possess an accent—becomes to stand out for your other speech qualities. Work on your accent, too, by recording your voice and listening to it. Also, as you speak, have a designated listener select words that aren’t being pronounced correctly. You should practice these. Immerse yourself in proper, clean English, and your accent will gradually improve, one word at a time. Regardless of your proficiency with English, you may want to spend time listening to recordings of famous speakers, or to books‐on‐tape. What did John F. Kennedy, George W. Bush6, Al Gore7 and Martin Luther King do or not do to make their words resonate within us? Look to acquire a more clean, grammatical English without sacrificing the informal turns of phrases that characterize everyday communication. Listen to your teammates, to the way that they say their most powerful phrases. Emulate and assist. When someone makes a blatant grammatical error—or even a subtle one that interferes with their oral effectiveness—let them know. And expect them to do the same for you. Don’t be afraid of imitating one another. At some stage in our development, we all learn language through imitation. In short, aspire to be clear and to hint at your own strength of character with your words. Be powerful and steady as you deliver speeches from deep inside of you. And though there are no encores in the Academic Decathlon, make sure you’re comfortable enough with your speech to give it twice in a row. And a third time. And a fourth. And once more when it matters most. An example of someone who mispronounces words and takes overly long pauses between sentences, yet can still be effective. 7 An example of someone who tends to speak in a monotone, though he has sounded more energetic now that he’s not actually running for president. 6
SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 69 OF 100
The Topic Hunter Before you write your speech we encourage you to select a topic that enthralls you. Otherwise, your work is likely to be half‐hearted, and your speech will become tiresome to deliver time and time again. If you don’t like your speech idea, neither will the judges. To help you find a topic, here are several categories of speeches with a few suggestions to start you on the right track toward inspiration. Note that these aren’t concrete divisions, but rather general guidelines, which overlap with but do not necessarily match those in our Speech Synopses. Don’t become preoccupied with trying to pigeonhole a topic. Many speeches inevitably fall into multiple categories. Remember that almost any kind of speech can become a call to action—and that these are often the most effective speeches. Informative Speeches The primary goal of these speeches is to convey information. Content in these types of speeches must be flawless and the delivery can make or break the speech. In past years speeches have been given on subjects as simple as coffee, chocolate, chili peppers, pie (at West High) and peaches. As you can see, people with food fetishes seem drawn to this type of speech. But this vehicle can also extend to speeches on left‐handedness, the invasion of tiger mosquitoes, eastern medicine, ballet dancing, contemporary philosophy or country music. Because of their often intellectual content, the delivery of these speeches must contain passion, energy, and humor. Their information must be accurate and organized. Here are a few suggestions for where to look for those core inspirations. Favorites. Consider items, objects, concepts and eccentric bits of knowledge that fulfill and fascinate you. Foods, hobbies, and people are all fair game. Give a speech on chocolate, on the wonder of Legos and Rubiks cubes, or on coffee shops. Dislikes. On a different note, look for inspiration in what you despise. Again, foods, people and habits are all eligible topics. Take care not to come off as overly whiny—these sorts of speeches should be about solutions, not despair. The Exciting and Exotic. Acupuncture and ballet dancing are prime examples. Under this category one might even fit “far out” topics such as the American obsession with aliens and conspiracy theory—a speech idea which has been performed with great gusto to gold medals in the past. Here the danger lies in becoming a fringe wacko. Guard against this by giving your speech to a variety of audiences. If you get too many weird looks, it may be time to reevaluate your idea. Concepts and Theories. Check out the latest theory of consciousness on the shelf of your local bookstore’s “science section.” Or explain the way that game theory might apply to interpretations of human behavior and history (Robert Wright does this masterfully in his book Nonzero.) 1491 is an excellent book on pre‐Columbian civilizations in the Americas. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 70 OF 100
MOSES WAS FROM MARS. One student we know tried giving a speech on how aliens have manipulated human history, claiming that a race of eccentric extraterrestrials parted the Red Sea, built the Pyramids, and assassinated John F. Kennedy. The speech met with giggles and dumbfounded expressions—as well as mediocre scores. Life’s mysteries. This subcategory might include left‐handedness, color blindness, sudden infant death syndrome (as presented in the 1998 national speech showcase) and other diseases or illnesses. One warning is to veer away from the extremely gross and shocking. Aim for the dramatic, novel and/or quietly sentimental. Pop Culture Speeches These speeches are as much about popular culture as they are a product of the times. For instance, in the 1980s, people might have spoken about yuppies, about the newfangled artistic innovation known as music television, and even about the space shuttle. Virtually any aspect of modern life and society can become the core of a speech. Problems with this type of speech, however, might include lack of hard data, and difficulty establishing a connection with your judges (who may be out of touch with the avant‐garde). Also, these speeches can emerge sounding somewhat trivial—which puts them at a disadvantage compared to vibrant “let’s make the world better” speeches. This can be remedied by integrating a call to action—demand that your audience reject an aspect of pop culture, such as the invasion of fast food franchises into our everyday lives. The lesson here is to write your speech for the appropriate audience. To find a topic touching on popular culture, consider the following sources. ♦ Cruise the magazine racks and scan the covers. Don’t limit yourself to Newsweek or Time. Instead, try to include a variety of magazines. One year, I scrutinized articles from numerous magazines, everything from Better Homes and Gardens to The New Yorker, from Cosmopolitan to Scientific American. One danger in selecting too well‐known a headline for a speech idea is that you can probably bet a number of speeches will be written on the exact same topic. ♦ Parents. Listen to people of older generations as they discuss what has changed, improved and deteriorated in the modern world. Note what bothers them about pop culture and what don’t they understand. Chances are your judges will be having the same misunderstandings and anxieties. Address them. ♦ Yourself and peers. Examine your existence—what you do, why you do it, where you go, why you go there—and draw your inspiration from these facts of life. ♦ Watch late night television. Commercials—and their Saturday Night Live parodies—can be vast sources of inspirations, alongside the monologues of folks like Jon Stewart, David Letterman and Jay Leno. These guys have their finger on the pulse of pop culture (thanks to large research and writing staffs.) Take advantage of their advantage. ♦ Drive (or ride a bus.) What do you see on the streets? Study people. Consider the shops at your local mini‐mall. Are there too many coffee shops, not enough libraries? Are there too many SUVs? What is the deal with those new “Curves” fitness centers? SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 71 OF 100
Controversial Speeches Topics from this category tend to sound like they belong at debate camp. The trick, of course, as we explain in our speech synopses, is to present the issue in a fair manner, detailing and defending your view, while acknowledging and gently handling the opposition. It’s a tricky road to travel, but when your words resonate in the minds of your judges and they respond with thoughtful nods. you’ve probably got a winner. Here, the ideas are easy to find, but difficult to turn into actual speeches. ♦ Boiler plate issues. Think affirmative action, illegal immigration, health care reform, preemptive military strikes, the privatization of social security—in short, anything that might belong in the realm of political platforms. ♦ Scan the editorial pages. What are the editors and readers discussing? Community policing? Enforced integration of schools? Negative political campaigning? ♦ Consider sitting in on a debate club meeting. What are your peers arguing about? What bones are they picking with society? Listen to the fervor and frequency with which they mention certain topics, and take the hint. Personal Speeches (and “sob stories”) Consider speaking from the self. People love to hear about people. This is part of the reason this category of speech does really well. Nearly anybody could give a speech of this type, and I’ve known many people who delivered tear‐wrenching gold medal speeches about events and crises they never actually experienced. But the bottom line is that these speeches can be done, and done well. Finding the perfect topic, though, is usually a difficult challenge and here are a few suggestions to help get you started. ♦ Traumatic events. This doesn’t necessarily have to be high tragedy a la Hamlet or King Lear. It could be as simple as a distressing and embarrassing event—say, the day your swimming suit came undone, a situation which could lead naturally into a fascinating discussion of human nudity taboos. Or—on a more serious note—you might give a speech about a terrible injury you overcame, or a difficult loss in your life. (Remember, the author Douglas Copland once wrote that each of us has a dead person living with us.) The key here is to get your judges emotionally involved, without taking them emotionally overboard—
though based on every national speech showcase we attend, it seems that bathos (the excessive manipulation of emotion often witnessed in daytime soap operas) is a perennially effective tactic. ♦ Childhood anecdotes. Little kids are cute (most of them). They do cute things (most of the time). Capitalizing on this is not difficult. Building an entire speech out of the time you got lost at the shopping mall might be challenging. But go ahead and give it a shot. ♦ Personal testimony. This works especially well with speakers who have survived something incredible, accomplished something amazing, or are simply extraordinary. This might include anything from climbing Mt. Whitney or circumnavigating the globe, to surviving the horrors of a highly rigid education system. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 72 OF 100
♦ Sources of inspiration. If you are motivated to succeed and be who you are because of a very moving and personal source of inspiration—say, the need to redeem a broken family, or to revive the spirits of a disabled sibling—this inspiration would probably make for a passionate speech with a shining, dramatic, sincere delivery. Novelty and Shock Speeches When helping us to search for new and exciting topics, my coach, George Floratos8, had his favorite line, “Don’t give a speech about any old rape. Do one on male rape. Don’t give a speech on women in the home. Do one on house‐husbands.” These speeches usually follow the scheme of information speeches, but their intrinsic appeal is in their novelty. They turn assumptions upside‐down, and stereotypes on their side. Looking for these usually involves working backwards: ♦ Find a traditional topic and set it on its head. This includes the house‐husband phenomenon and male rape. Putting a new spin on an old topic could win points. ♦ Pick a spotlight and peer into the shadows. An example here might be male ballet dancers. Traditionally, ballerinas were always given center stage—but in the background has lurked the rich world of Ninjinsky and other great male dancers. The novelty in discovering something usually overlooked is also worth points. At the nationals showcase in 2004, someone spoke on worms—a speech that ranged from earthworms to wormholes. It was intriguing, and resonated well with the audience. Search for off‐the‐wall answers to questions and problems. An example here might be the recycled homes idea. While trying to combat housing shortages and waste management, the unique idea of building housing out of bottles and cans arose in forward‐looking city planning offices. As a speaker, you could bring these ideas to the surface and analyze them for their worth and impact. Patriotic Speeches America, Americans, and anything about our nation, its rise, its glories, its foibles and its future falls into this category. Everything from the American Dream to the American Revolution is fair game. The draw here is the patriotism of the judges and the fact that we are among Americans in America. This category presents an easy and effective tactic for turning up a tremendous topic. ♦ History books. Wars, accomplishments, presidents. If it’s in a history book chances are that it will work. The main task is either to put a unique interpretative twist on it or otherwise bring “dead” history to full life for your judges. Good delivery is essential here. ♦ Rights. According to some patriotic pundits, our nation has always been in the right because of its emphasis on rights. Discuss a certain right—be it free speech or non‐
discrimination—and its evolution and/or current condition. You might want to steer clear of controversial rights such as the right to bear arms. A good speech might discuss the implied right to privacy, which is never specified in the Constitution. ♦ Ideals. Democracy. Freedom. Opportunity. The Frontier. Diversity. All of these are powerful words that can make for powerful speeches. Just a reminder that Michael Foster Kim is the lead author in this section. ‐ Daniel 8
SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 73 OF 100
♦ Alternate history. Consider picking a single event and describing how history might have been changed if that event had unfolded in a different way. What if the Los Angeles Clippers had drafted Michael Jordan? What if Hamilton hadn’t been shot in a duel? What if Japan hadn’t bombed Pearl Harbor? What if France hadn’t come to our aid in the Revolutionary War? What if we had conquered Canada in the War of 1812? ♦ 9/11 and the War on Terror. Speaking on the horrors of 9/11 and the need to fight terror guarantees a receptive audience—but be careful when it comes to the more controversial invasion of Iraq, and be wary, also, of audience burn‐out. 9/11 has been done a lot lately. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 74 OF 100
Potential Speech Topics ♦
America’s next great enemy—tell us who it is, and why. ♦
Weave song and prose together in an optimistic speech about a “few of your favorite things.” ♦
The impact of wireless Internet on the world of work. ♦
Discuss what is meant by the phrase “life is a revolving door.” ♦
What if Helen Keller had been born today? ♦
♦
The joys of teenage motherhood (this is a “shock” speech and must be delicately handled) Gay marriage—it’s a hot and very controversial issue. ♦
Stem cell research—it may be just as hot. ♦
The success of the musical Avenue Q—what does it tell us about society? Presents a choice opportunity to sing a few snatches of some very hummable tunes. ♦
Take a person—real or imagined—and offer a series of snapshots of his or her life at different ages. This is a very theatrical speech possibility that could go multiple directions. ♦
Comparing cartoons today to cartoons of yesteryear. ♦
Why pain should be a more important focus in medical practice. ♦
The value of prearranged marriages. ♦
The work of Dr. Paul Farmer (google him.) ♦
The experience of an amputee. ♦
Reimportation of drugs from Canada. ♦
What might Shakespeare have written today? ♦
Make a case for illegal immigration. ♦
♦
How to bargain. ♦
The importance of your mother—these are often tear‐jerkers. A humorous speech about nutritional guidelines—how they have changed over time, how they contradict one another, how they may be overly detailed. ♦
The story of a deceased sibling. ♦
American policies toward Cuba. ♦
Your first encounter with poverty. ♦
Discrimination against people who weigh more. ♦
“Sticks and stones may hurt my bones, but words will never hurt me.” Assess. ♦
A day in the life of your generation. ♦
The meaning of the shopping mall. ♦
Pick an everyday place and analyze it—a shopping mall, an airport—as a metaphor for life or for what it says about society. ♦
Pick a sport and explain its significance to you or its applicability to life in general (baseball, tae kwon do, etc.) ♦
Talk about libertarianism. Does any political party represent this viewpoint any longer? ♦
Talk about blogging. Most judges will be fascinated. ♦
Take one event and report on how it was reported by different news organizations (for example, compare MSNBC and FOXNEWS.) ♦
Allergies as a spiritual metaphor—why our souls reject certain toxins. ♦
The understated epidemic of sleep deprivation. ♦
Media credibility (particularly in light of the recent scandal with the New York Times and allegations of unfair coverage by news networks of the Iraqi conflict.) ♦
The effect of cameras on the way we remember our lives. ♦
Present a different way of electing the U.S. president. ♦
Criticize (or praise) reality TV shows. ♦
Discuss your first meeting with someone important to you—say, an author, an actress, or an athlete. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 75 OF 100
♦
The phenomenon of child acting—does it impact the children negatively? ♦
To what extent should we shield our environment from foreign species. ♦
Surrogate motherhood. Explain a few interesting legal cases involving mothers who were paid to give birth. ♦
♦
workforce.) ♦
The benefits of genetic engineering. ♦
Einstein’s first romance ♦
The value of good conversation. How can people become better at conversing? ♦
Eating disorders—this is a common one but can be done effectively and imaginatively. Consider eating disorders in other nations. The value of playing games. Is it always a waste of time? ♦
Where did popular foods come from, anyhow? Addiction—what is it, how does it work, is it always bad? Are we addicted to sports teams? To the Internet? ♦
Discrimination against (fill in the blank). ♦
The connection between biology and behavior—
how is it that the body knows how to do certain things on its own? Would we be more ourselves if our hormones were gone, or less? ♦
What is beauty? Describe some of those foreign customs—such as stretching of the lips or neck—that seem strange to conventional Americans. ♦
When is suffering good? Is it ever? ♦
What do the most religious people of each faith have in common? ♦
How do we learn to speak? Isn’t it a miracle? ♦
What does it mean to be an existentialist? An atheist? ♦
Why does the space program matter? What would it be like to colonize another world? ♦
Female stereotypes in Disney films—for instance, ever notice the title characters rarely have mothers? ♦
How danger is important in life. ♦
The gullibility of society. ♦
Discrimination against the elderly. ♦
Censorship. Good or bad? Necessary? ♦
♦
A history of absolute zero, or some other scientific concept A defense of popular literature, such as John Grisham. ♦
♦
Are symbols such as the American flag being diluted by their use in advertising, campaign speeches and numerous commercials? (read Neal Postman’s Technopoly for details.) Should national parks be more secluded or more accessible? ♦
Do celebrities shape society?—or does society shape celebrities? ♦
Does the World Wide Web have a negative impact on the way we interact and learn? ♦
Gender and assumptions (tomboys, etc.) ♦
The absurdity of modern slogans. ♦
The need for a hands‐on approach to education. Public transportation—can it succeed in America? ♦
Courage. Do we remember what it means? ♦
Clocks and how they changed the world ♦
♦
The importance of non‐conformity. How those “Successories” posters have guided your life. ♦
The overemphasis on competition in today’s world—a very ironic topic! ♦
Masks—their histories, their metaphors. ♦
What does it mean to say that we are the product of our genes? ♦
The value of independence. ♦
Fairy godmothers ♦
Is religion something we should be allowed to choose and not brought up to believe automatically? ♦
♦
The disappearance of childhood (everything from earlier menarche to children in the SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 76 OF 100
♦
The value of dependence—do we try too hard to be separate entities in today’s world? ♦
Is love real, or a concept perpetrated by modern media and by zealous poets? ♦
The value of silence. Conversely, why do people like loud music? ♦
The value of pets. ♦
Why do we have interns in Washington? ♦
Speed limits. If speed limits were actually enforced, what would be the impact? ♦
Artistic education—should it be part of the curriculum? ♦
What is a fair test? Multiple choice? Essay? Can a test be fair at all? ♦
Chocolate—its history, its meaning. ♦
The value of nostalgia. Explain why it is that smells conjure this up more quickly than sights or sounds. ♦
The biological roots of déjà vu. ♦
seems to look the other way when it comes to students in college—especially first‐years. ♦
What makes vacations valuable? ♦
The rapid pace of technological advance ♦
Could robots one day replace human beings? Consider the films I, Robot and A.I. ♦
What ever happened to pinball and other classic games of the 1980s? ♦
The music of Bob Dylan (or your favorite performer.) ♦
Discrimination against readers of non‐serious literature (such as science fiction.) ♦
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome—an invisible plague? Should the government get involved? ♦
What would you say if you met both younger and older versions of yourself? ♦
What if the Civil War had ended with a Confederate Victory? ♦
How would the world really react if aliens arrived? Dreaming. How does it work? Why? What can it inspire? ♦
Do we put too much stock in originality in literature and not enough on a good story? ♦
Equality. ♦
♦
Share the life story of your Decathlon coach. ♦
Taking responsibility. Do we blame drugs, upbringing and illness more than we do ourselves? Should we? The struggle for freedom in (select a nation of your choice.) ♦
♦
Analyze a recent television show (perhaps one on HBO?) for cultural significance. Personal tragedies. If you were responsible for an accident, do you feel guilty? ♦
The paradox of global want in an age of plenty. ♦
Pick a quote—say, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do”—and explain it. ♦
The value of athletics in education. How about athletic scholarships? ♦
Describe the way that certain unscrupulous Academic Decathletes cheat or lie on their tests and in the subjective events. ♦
Share a story from your travels, and a moral that it teaches. ♦
Is there an American culture? If so, is Canada part of that culture? Why do we call ourselves America, anyway? Is that offensive to our Latin American colleagues? ♦
Should Europe be unified? ♦
Is art advancing in the modern world? Or are we too wrapped up in self‐referential, complicated pieces? ♦
Do computers change us in ways that we never expected? ♦
The value of fear—and the ways in which horror films and such shows as Fear Factor distort or misconstrue this value. ♦
Describe a religious group—such as Eastern Orthodoxy—and explain it. If you’re a member, great! If not, no worries—you come across sounding objective and open‐
minded. ♦
Make a case against the hypocrisy of a legal system that forbids underage drinking but SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 77 OF 100
♦
What would Shakespeare have written today? ♦
Grade inflation—is it a real problem at top schools such as Princeton? ♦
Pick an animal species and describe its current situation—is it endangered? What don’t we know about it? ♦
Hurricane Katrina ♦
Religious exploration: for instance, what is the Eastern Orthodox Church? ♦
The musical Avenue Q What is America’s mission? ♦
Should the TV character House be a hero? Parental pressure. Do parents try too hard to shape the lives of their children? ♦
Something about iPods ♦
The country of Molvania (do a Google search) ♦
The appeal of drugs. ♦
♦
Is college the best path for everyone? The American obsession with Lost and other television series (this changes every year) ♦
The value of each of our senses—smell, sight, hearing, touch and so on. ♦
A history of how cars got their names ♦
What does “w00t” actually mean? (i.e. leetspeak) ♦
High school massacres—why? Their impact on our own schools? ♦
The operetta The Beastly Bombings ♦
2020 visions: Where will the world and you be in 2020? (or 2050, or 2100…) ♦
In defense of a nuclear North Korea ♦
Why it’s good to be short ♦
Should schooling be allowed over the Internet? ♦
Endorsing arranged marriages. ♦
Advertisement. Good or bad? ♦
Share the anecdote of a single immigrant family to the United States. ♦
A patient’s bill of rights—for or against? ♦
Are college admissions committees too gullible, too easily swayed by sob stories and tales of impoverishment or persecution? ♦
♦
♦
Talk about illegal immigration… of Americans to Canada. ♦
In favor of religious extremism ♦
The importance of rewarding the rich ♦
Stock mania ♦
Athletes are not paid enough ♦
Amusement parks—too risky? ♦
There are not enough television choices ♦
Describe changes in the English language, and the obscure origin of certain words. ♦
Sleep is the greatest problem facing America today ♦
An analysis of the current dispute over video and music content on the Internet. ♦
Politicians should be allowed to take bribes ♦
Raise an argument about the length of the American work day. ♦
There is too much emphasis on safety in air travel, at the expense of efficiency ♦
Changes in the Academic Decathlon—what would you do differently? ♦
Presidents should not be chosen by popular vote ♦
Climate change should be accelerated to create additional oceanfront properties ♦
The beauty of fast food franchises ♦
Movie previews—a history and critique ♦
The dangers and deceptions of bottled water ♦
A history of government health advice that was later contradicted ♦
Invent a new superhero ♦
Regulating risky activities—such as bicycle‐
riding—that we normally ignore Discuss British funding of television series (such as nature documentaries and even Dr. Who) ♦
Deconstruct some urban myths ♦
The male birth control pill ♦
NASCAR—what’s the fascination? ♦
SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 78 OF 100
Gold Medal Showcase To supplement the Speech Synopses with other perspectives, we’ve asked a number of champion Decathletes to submit their own speeches with—if they so desired—explanations of why they developed them in the way that they did. As a Decathlete, if you would like to see your speech published someday, we invite you to submit it to us. The first of these speeches is by Stephen Zammit, of Acton‐Boxborough Regional High School in Massachusetts. We have preserved his advice in the left‐hand column. Steve Zammit—“Coins and Crickets” ACTON‐BOXBOROUGH REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL The introduction:
Stories, quotes, and
anecdotes are the most
common techniques in
opening a speech.
These teasers should set the
stage, and draw the
attention of your audience.
Time to get down to
business! Your thesis
statement should appear by
the 2nd paragraph.
Mine is italicized.
Imagine, two men walking along a busy street in New York City during morning rush hour. Abruptly, one of the men, a zoologist, asks his friend if he hears a cricket in the street. The friend looks at his colleague and warns him that he’s been spending a little too much time in the bat cave. But sure enough, there on the edge of the sidewalk is a cricket. Later, the zoologist removes a couple of coins from his pocket and drops them to the cement. Immediately, everyone within 50 feet turns when the coins hit! The zoologist’s point: we hear what we want to hear, and block out what we consider to be unimportant. Everyday we wander through life oblivious to much of what transpires around us. Interaction with our environment however, is paramount to social development, and the skill of listening to other people is the most important aspect of this process. As psychologist Dr. Earl Koile points out, we spend on average 45% of our communicative time listening. So, it is imperative that we develop better, more accurate listening skills. This part of the speech
changed with every delivery.
I knew what I wanted to
say, yet I never committed
the words to memory. This
drove my coach crazy, but it
kept me focused.
Listening to the coins and the crickets may seem a tad silly by nature. However, Carl Rogers, a psychologist, once said that “man’s inability to communicate is a result of his failure to listen effectively, skillfully, and with understanding.” Certainly, we can all recall situations in our personal lives where we could have avoided serious problems by simply listening attentively. And in business, no one ever listens Remember: you are writing themselves out of job. a speech, not an essay. Try
to use active verbs and
blend in parts that allow you
to change your voice tone.
This paragraph adds a
somber dimension to offset
the earlier mix of analysis
and humor.
At the same time, the tragedy of not listening can have woeful consequences. At a Spanish airport in 1977, 583 people aboard to Boeing 747 aircraft died. The accident was caused by the misinterpretation of instructions and an improper response to those orders. The flight crews aboard the two planes as well as the people in the flight control tower did not listen to each other attentively. Leading to a collision between the two aircraft which then burst into flames. Disaster is never very far away when we fail to listen. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 79 OF 100
Anticipate
and
answer
questions related to your
thesis: e.g. since listening is
important, how do we
become better listeners?
The answer is in italics.
Making the audience relate
is crucial.
Try to leave the audience
with an upbeat thought.
If you can, tie the conclusion
back to the introduction. Yes, listening is perhaps the most complicated and error prone of all the skills which we possess. But as Dr. Michael Nichols, a pioneer in the field of listening, reminds us, it’s also the most essential. And at its heart is the demanding requirement that we “suspend memory desire and judgment ‐ and for a few moments, exist for the other person.” It sounds so easy doesn’t it? Yet, when was the last time you interrupted someone with a phrase like; ... well, if I were you ... or ... that reminds of the time. These canned responses allow us an easy way out of the truly difficult task of receiving what someone is struggling to communicate. So, please consider the opportunities that open when we open ourselves to honest listening. Our everyday living, our work, the entire quality of our being improve. Behavioral scientist Elton Mayo once said that, “one friend, one person who truly takes the trouble to listen to us, can change our whole outlook on the world.” We must not allow ourselves to tune out. If we do, we may miss something as simple, yet remarkable, as the chirp of a cricket. Grant Farnsworth—“∞” BELEN HIGH SCHOOL Many an evening I step outside in the empty darkness and gaze heavenward in wonder. I do not gasp at the enormity or brilliant fire of the countless stars, but at the countlessness itself. All of the wonder and awe of a lifetime can be summed up in just one word—infinity. A billion minds all have pondered the same questions to little avail. What is the fundamental nature of infinity? Can it be understood? Infinity describes the property of being without end, without definite position or scope, but what exactly is it? When I was a little sophomore, I had an excursion with the infinite that created my respect for it. I tried to write a proof showing one divided by zero to be infinity. Now one divided by zero is undefined in terms of mathematics, so I knew I would have problems, but I thought it was worth a try. In my proof, I stated that dividing is just adding the denominator in a fraction to itself enough times to equal the numerator, and then counting the number of times one did that. Obviously, you would have to add zero to itself infinite times in order total one. Logical isnʹt it? My math teacher was not impressed. I had broken an almighty rule in algebraic proofs and messed with infinity. You see, infinity is not a single number, it is just the number that is larger than any one you specify now. Therefore normal operations canʹt be performed on it. For example, what is infinity times 2? Infinity? What is infinity divided by infinity? One? By using the properties of infinity and substitution, you can prove that one is equal to two —‐ and that you are a moron. While the very nature of infinity, whether in mathematics, space, or time makes it impossible to fully comprehend, it can be understood to an extent. For example, one of the best mind boggling questions in the history of the world, ʺIs there an end to the universe, and if there is, what is beyond it.ʺ A logical contradiction makes it impossible to comprehend. However, according to Einsteinian physics, space curves around mass. Therefore the universe may curve back completely on itself. For SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 80 OF 100
example, if you fly a space machine in a straight line, eventually you will come back to your original spot. The universe doesnʹt end, and there is no beyond, but there is a definite size. You may think that theory is hard to grasp, but it beats the old notion of never‐ending nothing. Granted, infinity is difficult to comprehend, it can still be used for the benefit of mankind. Impossible you say? we shall see. The entire study of calculus depends heavily upon infinity to come up with its answers. A good example can be seen in my calculus teacherʹs method of finding an oblique asymptote. ( That is to say, a straight line that a function never crosses as its X values become ... well ... infinity.) Due to some strange and magical force of nature, you can let X go to infinity, and then evaluate a function to find the slope of the asymptote. ʺWhat do you mean let X go to infinity?ʺ I asked. Well, you close your eyes, utter an incantation, and then steal the leading two numbers. Whoa, the calculus‐magic works again. Of all the concepts to be learned and all the knowledge to be gained, one thing sticks out above the rest. Awesome and incomprehensible, the powers of this thing are unlimited. Infinity! Infinity is the soul of all thing unbelievable. It is the answer to the great and mysterious question of life, the question that has burned the minds of geniuses since the beginning of time: ʺhuh?ʺ The strongest point of this speech is the delivery it allowed me. The subject matter, while in some ways high‐brow, did not appeal to most people. However, I gambled that judges would understand that the subject matter was of a certain intellectual level and would appreciate the animated delivery and the creativity used, without necessarily comprehending the entire speech. There are several statements included for comic effect only, which should be viewed as such and not as serious expositions. The speech begins in a low and pensive tone, indicating the delivererʹs intention to be emotional and thought‐provoking. This method of beginning a speech quiets the audience and increases the attention level of the listeners. Note that the first few word already create vivid images. While the image of a young man gazing at the stars adds little information to the explanation of the nature of infinity, it creates interest and adds personality. I increased volume and speed throughout the opening paragraph, changing the mood from one of wonder to one of interest in the subject, infinity. The first paragraph points out the fact that infinity is not a quantity easily manipulated and that it is difficult to comprehend. In effect, this paragraph creates respect for infinity itself. The second paragraph asserts that despite infinityʹs incomprehensible nature, it can still be understood from certain perspectives. Although it cannot be totally grasped, one may know of infinity and see that it is a common quantity in nature. The third paragraph indicates that infinity can also be useful and helpful, however mystical. The tone of this paragraph once again is one of almost ignorant wonder and it stresses the inability of the mind to understand unbounded quantity. And like the first paragraph, the last one adds interest and respect for the subject of infinity, finally ending with a reminder that it will never be fully understood. This speech was written in conventional essay form: intro, three points, conclusion. For an expository speech, this is a fairly good method, although perhaps not the best. The interrupted tone and vernacular language sets it apart from a formal essay. Remember that spoken English is a whole different language from its written counterpart. In order to make a speech sound natural, one must speak the words while one writes them and find a happy compromise between keeping the language formal and keeping it interesting. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 81 OF 100
David Gutierrez—“Suppose You Were a Book” MERION HIGH SCHOOL Suppose you were a book. Somewhere in your pages, your author used a word that doesn’t meet with government approval. It doesn’t matter which one. In Nazi Germany, it might have been “democracy.” In the Soviet Union, “capitalism.” In Iraq, “George Bush”—either one. To shield against your evil, the government censors you, mutilates your pages, even burns you. All the effort invested in you by your author goes wasted. This may sound like the action of a totalitarian regime. Often, it has been. But censorship is also a trademark of our very own United States of America. In 1991, agencies of the United States government forced guidelines upon school libraries that proscribed such classics as The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and My Name is Asher Lev. These works were judged too racist or traumatic for young minds. Mark Twain, in particular, was singled out for his use of language—as though we, in the late twentieth century, have the right to find guilty of racism a man who, immersed in a society that stank of stereotypes, somehow produced a work of clarity and majesty. In it he pays homage to humanity and heroism—yet some people look only at its surface, without realizing it includes racism because it is about racism and overcoming it! Already Charles Dickens has fallen under the scalpel—his Great Expectations arousing anger because the hero, Pip, makes the mistake of “mistreating” his uncle Joe. As the writer Isaac Asimov once said, “It seems that certain outspoken individuals will only be satisfied with stories about saints—not about human beings who learn from their mistakes.” Will the government censor C. S. Lewis’s Chronicles of Narnia for including Christian symbols and thus “indoctrinating”? Will they cut the Diary of Anne Frank for referencing German racial slurs against the Jews? Or does the government conscience only extend to censoring works that reveal the sins of our own nation’s history? As for the argument that these works will encourage children to become racist or use foul language—it seems the select few who push for their censorship have yet to discover cable television and to listen to conversation at a local playground—or at the typical dinner table. The roots of racism and foul language are not bound in paper. In the 1940s authors were discouraged from using the word “died.” Instead, characters “closed their eyes forever” or “passed away.” Did this delicate maneuver eliminate the reality of death? It seems society wanted to disbelieve in dying. Even Harriet the Spy, a prize‐winning children’s novel, was attacked for obliquely mentioning the protagonist’s first menstrual period. Is something half the world experiences worthy of taboo? The elimination of writers who might offend or influence, constitutes a gigantic social stumble backwards. Let parents who want their children in an ivory tower build it themselves. And let the rest of us read what we will, for the best reason of all: not to revise history, but to build on it. Emma Wu—“See Fleas.” HIGHLAND PARK HIGH SCHOOL Humans define civilization. According to the grand rulers of the universe, ourselves, we are more SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 82 OF 100
advanced and more sophisticated than our monkey minions. After all, we’re the ones with confusing political mazes, culture a la Jerry Springer, and computers that organize, alphabetize, systemize, and‐brainwash‐ize. The monkeys, well, they’ve got bananas. And fleas. Lots of fleas. Yet we still haven’t escaped our primitive roots. Now watered down to “athletic entertainment,” sports are a milder remnant of our savage rituals. Take boxing, for example. With only fists to attack and flesh to protect, “survival of the fittest” is key. Boxers jab and retreat then attack anew, playing Cat and Mouse until one falters. Then the other pounces, silencing the opposition with a slash to the throat. The victor emerges, seizing the Mandate of Boxer Heaven, at least until a new challenger defeats him. See alpha wolves. See sibling rivalry. To some, fighting for supreme status isn’t appealing. Thus, these athletes turn to brawl‐in‐bulk for primal satisfaction. Just look at hockey. While defending their meager territories, Yetti‐like skaters weave in, out and through their toothless adversaries in a quest to score. Serious injuries are merely added bonuses. See bumper cars. See monster truck mania. However, the epitome of territorial savagery is good ol’ Sunday Night Football. Rather than simply marking boundaries, football seems to think more physical representation is necessary. Hulking teams line up head‐to‐head, army versus army, poised to pound whatever dares to cross the turf. Forget guerilla strategies or sniper‐rifles; we’re back to the American Revolution here, minus muskets, bugle boys and tacky clothing. Wait, scratch the last two. See marching bands. See uniforms. On the less violent side of sports, we have presentation events like figure skating. Judges reach new depths of shallowness, ranking competitors by, dare I say it, looks and looks alone. But it’s all natural, completely normal in the wild. When searching for a mate, even the female panda assumes a “come hither” posture: head lowered and rear raised. See…let’s not go there. And then we have the races. Every animal is either predator or prey, and racers happen to be of the latter. Like timid bunnies, runners twitch and tremble and tense at any sudden movement, any random noise. At the sound of the gun, they’re off, fleeing from the unseen but supposedly heard predator. Swimmers, bikers, skaters, skiers: they’re the escape artists, choosing flight over fight. See paranoid schizophrenia. Well, you would know. The compilation of these primal ritual wannabes is known as the Olympics, except our generation also includes several extra sports. Have no fear, for they too have roots in our indigenous heritage. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 83 OF 100
The triple jump is actually hopping over stepping‐stones to cross a stream. Volleyball is just trading cannonballs over a big wall. In gymnastics, bar events are simply monkeying around in a tree, sans fleas. In fact, the only obvious difference between the average sport and its more savage predecessor is the lack of fleas. Well, most of the time. See locker rooms. Dawn Perlner—“A Dangerous Epidemic” ACTON‐BOXBOROUGH REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL There is a dangerous epidemic sweeping our nation today. It consumes people bit by bit, affecting not only their body and mind, but their work, their families, their friends, and their colleagues. Many of my friends have contracted this disease. I myself am recovering from one particular variety. The ailment from which I suffered is known as TETRIS. TETRIS was one of the first and most addictive computer games ever invented. The player is given two‐dimensional blocks made up of four squares attached together at the sides, which are dropped down on top of each other. The player must rotate them and move them so that they fit together, and when a whole horizontal line is filled in, it disappears. The game ends when the player piles the blocks too high. Part of the reason why this game is so addictive is that one cannot beat it. There is no point at which the player cannot do better than before; theoretically, a person could play forever. Also, since the various pieces are dropped at random, and there are 7 different pieces, there are already 7 to the 100th power, or approximately 10 to the 83rd, different game set‐ups for just the first 100 pieces. In a typical game, however, many hundreds or even thousands of pieces will be dropped before the game ends. And the player can create a different game with the same pieces by dropping them differently. This allows a player to play repeatedly for hours and days on end, never experiencing the same game twice. After trying TETRIS at age twelve, I found myself immune for the simple reason that the game was difficult and a little drab. However, a few years later I was introduced to a new variety, fortified with colored blocks and interesting sound effects, and I found myself immediately hooked. I was unable to give up playing even after I conquered all 10 high scores on the family computer! TETRIS is not the only game to which people have become addicted. Other games such as minesweeper and solitaire have also proven socially problematic. Children play instead of completing schoolwork, employees play through lunch hour and into the time when they should be working, and who profits from all of this? The game companies certainly do, but people and companies producing other products suffer. Game players lose their personal time, when they could have been reading a book, listening to music, or spending time with their families. Companies lose their production time because their employees are playing instead of working. In fact, the producers of the game MYST have received numerous letters reporting that people have beaten the game in about 40 hours. Most also completed it within a week after first playing the game. This means that they were spending as much time playing MYST as working for their “play”‐check! SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 84 OF 100
In all seriousness, computer games are not killing anybody, but they are murdering our valuable free time, work time, and intellectual capacities. Games should not be used excessively. They are at best an amusing distraction, and at worst, an impediment to industry and society. Time that is now filled with TETRIS, MYST, minesweeper, or other games could be better filled with intellectual endeavors such as reading, researching topics of interest, and attending the theater or symphony. Instead of Nintendo or TETRIS, parents should consider getting their children books or CDs for their birthdays. It’s time we realize there’s more to life than dropping blocks, flipping cards, and finding mines. Josephine Dru—“The Salt Of The Earth” NATIONAL SPEECH SHOWCASE Many people today believe that the concepts of science and religion have become mutually exclusive. They see science as being guided by the head, with its emphasis on knowledge and logic, while religion is guided by the heart, with its focus on faith and sentiment. I believe otherwise, and base my assertion that science and religion are inseparable on a combination of statements I have found in the Bible and facts I have learned in science class. The Bible tells me to “speak the truth in love.” It also says to “be the salt of the world.” In chemistry this year, we examined the basic structure of salt, and I gained a new insight into the connection between these two commands. Sodium, one of the components of salt, is a highly reactive metal‐ by itself, it is so dangerous that it can’t be stored in open air for fear of an explosion. Likewise, a life guided by love without truth is explosively dangerous. It can lead to such tragedies as the family members of an alcoholic covering up his problem for him. By thus lying out of a misguided love, they actually enable him to continue his destructive habits. Chlorine, the other component of salt, is a poisonous gas, lethal to human beings. A life guided by truth without love is similarly venomous to those around it. For a small illustration of the damage loveless truth can do, think about the last time someone told you ‐ bluntly ‐ about one of your faults and you could feel their dislike or insensitivity. Their words may have been true, but the way in which they were said hurt your feelings and probably didn’t help you to improve. Acting and speaking with truth OR love can have consequences as negative as those that occur when sodium OR chlorine is taken singly. However, when an atom of sodium is bonded to an atom of chlorine, we suddenly find ♦ salt ‐ that can add flavor to almost any dish; ♦ salt ‐ that can cleanse and disinfect a wound; ♦ salt ‐ that can prevent dangerous ice from forming on the roads in wintertime. When salt is taken as a whole, it becomes useful and beneficial. In the same way, a life that combines commitments to both love and truth will be valuable to everyone who comes into contact with it. A friend who is both honest and caring can flavor almost any situation with joy. A friend who is willing both to listen with concern and to talk things through openly can help to cleanse the pollution of anger or resentment from injured feelings. A friend who sees you going the wrong way SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 85 OF 100
and lets you know ‐ gently yet truthfully ‐ can keep you from betraying your values and slipping on the road of life. What is science, but the love of truth? And what is religion, but the truth of love? For me, the two coexist in a symbiotic relationship: the explanations provided by science intensify the meaning behind the truths I find in the Bible, while my belief in a Creator God enables me to experience the wonder of learning how His world works. For me, Jesus is the Friend who combines the aspects of ultimate love and truth that fulfill my existence. With head and heart in harmony, my life is whole. Karl Staser—“Straining Lungs” REITZ MEMORIAL HS, INDIANA Straining lungs pound against my rib cage as I delve through the dark water. Mud swirls beneath my body and bubble rise to the surface, products of my expiring oxygen. I stalk through the shadows of the water, diving between rays of sunlight and schools of fish, hoping to find the little shelled creatures I so desperately seek. My hands scour the floor of the lake and search for each tiny mussel, shelled creatures pitifully resembling their oyster‐brothers. By the tens, I gather the sea‐
dwellers in my hands and hope that just one of the private chambers will contain an iridescent pearl of invaluable proportions. The English author Samuel Johnson once wrote, “The natural flights of the human mind are not from pleasure to pleasure, but from hope to hope.” Hope gives humans drive and courage to create and explore, to discover and conquer. Every person possesses some nuance of hope, with potential to leave this hope fulfilled or not. But what is hope and how does it apply to a young boy with impossible dreams of grandeur, futilely seeking an exquisite pearl the lowly mussel? Hands filled by muddy shells, I struggle to the surface for a gasp of air. As the torpid bottom of the lake fades into darkness, sunlight from the other world above dances on my body. My head explodes through the surface of the dark lake in the powerful, slow‐motion grace of a determined rescuer, explorer of hidden treasure, or rescued drowning victim. I gasp for air, hearing and smelling the normalcy of the world above—my brother fishing from a dock, my grandmother in her lawn chair reading—all unaware of my efforts beneath the surface. In every effort, I hope that this arduous task reaps the benefit of fortune9. Hope is an element of our lives that guides tasks but does not promise to give reward. For this, the man without hope cannot succeed in achieving great things. Because they lack hope, many persons fail in their attempts to achieve unreachable goals. As Emily Dickinson wrote: Hope is the thing with feathers‐ Good practice for an episode of Fear Factor, at least. 9
SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 86 OF 100
That perches in the soul‐ And sings the tunes without the words‐ And never stops‐at all‐ Hope may represent the intangible or unconquerable, but the mere conviction of achieving hope keeps us going. I split the shells of each mussel, hoping for the spoil of riches. Every crack of the closed lid provides a chance for success, but the pearl is never to be found. My hope is unfulfilled, and a little boy’s heart is broken. Then I turn my head, and see the water again, finding that glimmer of—yes—hope shining beneath the water’s surface. In a quick surge of impatience and desire, I dive back into the cool water and resume the search. Hope can embody the futile or the purposeful. The only problem is that we do not know what is worthwhile in our endeavors until we succeed or fail. But I can assure you that humanity without hope is a race without soul. Don Kingsburg—“Vegan Power” SLINGER HS, INDIANA “You don’t eat meat? You don’t even drink milk?” To many people, that’s a far‐out statement. When you look at it, burgers, shakes, sirloin steaks, even milk and cookies are all a piece of our culture, in their own way. I mean, c’mon, everybody has to animals in some way or another, right? Wrong. And that’s a fact I end up explaining three or four times a day. See, I’m a vegan, which means when culture says consume animals, I don’t listen. Maybe a definition would help. Vegans are those who don’t eat, drink, or—in many cases—even wear animals in any way, shape or form. Think of us if you will as the strictest of the strict—super vegetarians. Now, most people I tell this to have the same question: “Why?” and “How can you live so strict?” Well, vegans choose this lifestyle because we realize how we can benefit our health, the world’s health, and the health of the animals we aren’t eating. First, by abstaining from eating animals, I’m doing wonders for my body. According to the New England Journal of Medicine, all the drugs, hormones and chemicals pumped into livestock to increase their production of meat, milk, and eggs are transferred into the human that consumes that animal. And to sum up the body to the article, these substances do far more harm to your body than good. In fact, for this reason, many AIDS patients choose a vegan diet, because it’s so much less taxing on their already‐weakened immune systems. And let’s not forget what the doctors have been saying for years: diets based on animal abound with complications. You’ve got saturated fats, SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 87 OF 100
strokes, Salmonella, cholesterol, clogged arteries, e. coli, and even mad cow disease, just to name a few10. More and more, the risks of eating flesh outweigh the benefits. More important to me is the health of the earth, because let’s face it, the ways in which man raises animals so that he can eat them are endangering the environment. For example, to feed the animals one carnivorous human eats in one year requires three and a quarter acres of grazing land. Vegans only need one‐sixth of that. That’s twenty healthy vegans for every carnivore! And consider this fact in light of our expanding global population. In a study done by Penn State University with the Institute for Ecological Studies, it was estimated that in the 1990s, for every Big Mac ordered at a McDonald’s restaurant, 55 square feet of rainforest were converted into farmland. That’s a hefty price to pay for a hamburger! My final reason: the animals. My argument is a simple one. I believe the Golden Rule (treat others as you would have them treat you) to be universal, for all creatures, even those humankind holds itself to be above. Well, many times, even after I explain myself to people, I don’t change their diets. But though I may not have converted the two of you into Animal Abolitionists today, at least I’ve informed you about a segment of the population that chooses to look behind what culture dictates. They do it because they see the effects a culture can have on their bodies, on the earth, and the creatures with whom they share the earth. We call ourselves vegans. Thank you. Mariam Nassiri—“Genesis Poem” MARSHALL HS, CALIFORNIA Fusion of the five elements, to search for the higher intelligence Women walk around celibate, livin’ irrelevant The most benevolent king, communicatin’ through your dreams Mental pictures been painted…heard and seen Everywhere, throughout your surroundin’ atmosphere Troposphere, thermosphere, stratosphere Can you imagine? From one single idea, everything appeared here Understanding makes my truth crystal clear. Intriguing poem, isn’t it? Let’s explicate some of its ideas, shall we? When RZA, the poet, asserts that his surroundings appeared “from one single idea,” he alludes to Genesis 1 of the Bible, stating that God spoke the world into existence. Paraphrasing and expanding on this idea, the modern bard describes the components of his environment, created by a supreme being. So much can be taken and interpreted from a few well‐meant lines. Such creativity can be found in this rhymester’s words. *pause* Would it surprise you if I told you that RZA is a rapper? Oh, I forgot. You’re used to hearing Of course, even fruit juice can kill—witness the Odwalla crisis a few years back. 10
SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 88 OF 100
It’s gettinʹ hot in here So take off all your clothes I am, getting so hot, I wanna… …wonder what in blazes that was. You’ve probably settled back in your usual cushion of safety, and have gone back to the common assumption that Rap is tired, superficial, and devoid of all substance. Yes, the work of artists like Nelly may be what is usually portrayed in the media, because, after all, promiscuity and mindless clichés are what sell commercially. But when was the last time you perceived that everything you saw on television was true? Hmm…I believe that Rap has been distorted by the media, and been hacked at by those who do not see the changing forms of expression. Now, let me guess. The image you see regarding the taste of Rap fans includes: nearly naked, aggressive females, joined by a flashy man hunchbacked by the five‐thousand‐pound jewelry he wears—and who can be sure of its authenticity? *wink* True‐to‐its culture, real Rap music is actually found in the underground Hip‐Hop scene, where rappers spin their street poems with no regard for commercial success. Professor Laurence Perrine defines good poetry and bad poetry in his textbook, Sound and Sense, writing that good poetry must “[appeal] richly to our senses” as well as intellect, “[while succeeding] excellently in its purpose.” With RZA’s Genesis poem in mind, wouldn’t you agree that Rap poetry considered less noteworthy by big business fulfills these poetic prerequisites? If so, why don’t RZA and other rappers in his league achieve more mainstream approval? Looking back, we see that popular minstrels of the Elizabethan period performed for the queen in her own castle north of the Thames River, mindlessly spouting immaterial ballads of the time. But…Shakespeare, arguably the greatest poet of all time, who certainly exemplifies the Perrine ideals, received no royal treatment. The Globe Theater, where his plays were staged, remained in the gritty red light district south of the Thames, achieving little support from the more established level of society. So…the next time you hear a bass‐booming Rap beat floating in the streets, or catch a glimpse of a few Hip‐Hop lines escape a student’s lips, how will you react? Will you immediately be taken in by those oh‐so‐persuasive rants about the evils of Rap, or will you actually stop, and consider the significance of the verse? While you may cling onto one branch of poetry that I do not, I only ask that you consider the poetic pursuits of Rap, and please, keep an open mind. Magali Ferare—“The Judges Are Looking At Me Funny” SAN BENITO HS, CALIFORNIA [very airheaded tone of voice, to judges, twirling hair etc] Hello! I am, um, like, um… here to talk to you today uh… about‐ [‘phone’ rings] Oh, sorry, that’s my cell. Would you wait a minute? Thanks. Hello? Oh! HI Jenny! What’s up? …he asked you OUT? OH MY GOSH! THAT’S SO‐ oh… um… Jen, I’m kinda giving my speech… and the judges are all looking at me funny. I’ll call you back real soon, k? SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 89 OF 100
[turn attention to judges, talking in a more serious and intelligent manner] I just completed a normal teenage cell phone conversation. Although it was relatively short, had I held this conversation in another situation, during that time I could have been in an accident or caused one, ignored my friends, annoyed strangers, interrupted a business meeting or wedding ceremony, or ruined the climax of an action‐packed film. [assume a more businesslike tone] Youʹve heard of the Renaissance, the Industrial Revolution, the Progressive Era. Well, this is the Cellular Age, and these days if we are not on the internet weʹre blabbing on the cell phone. Since the introduction of cell phones in 1983, the number of cell phone users has quickly leaped to 120 million users nationwide. With this increase in cellular discourse, there has been a documented increase in car accidents caused by inattention, and there has also been a decrease in the amount of courtesy society as a whole exhibits towards others. Let me be clear about this: cell phones are probably the second‐greatest inventions ever… after pop tarts. Technology and its myriad of benefits are not the problem; people are. Cell phones are often heard going off in what are deemed ‘unacceptable’ places; but you’ll notice that it’s people who choose to answer them. For example, in 2000, 39% of Americans thought it perfectly OK to talk on their mobiles while in rest rooms. By 2002, it jumped to 47%. People are defining new rules and new behavior for whatʹs personal and whatʹs private. A global network of anthropologists calling themselves “context‐based research group” has been tracking this increase in cell‐phone‐induced discourtesy for years. The results of their just‐
completed, six‐country field study of wireless habits found that the vast majority of mobile users frown on loud or private calls in public. But yet 9 times out of 10, that same majority indulges in such ‘irresponsible’ calls themselves. But it is not merely Miss Manners and her posse who are worried by this new cell phone phenomenon; there are more immediate and damaging effects of constant cellular chatter. Cell ownership increases by 40% each year, and the decibel level is rising steadily… along with interruptions, transgressions, and, perhaps most importantly… car accidents. According to recent research, nearly 25 percent of the 6.3 million annual crashes caused by driver inattention are cell‐
phone related. Because of this, 41 states now support legislation to ban or reduce use of cell phones on the road, as opposed to only 27 three years ago. This proposed legislation, while helpful perhaps for a while, does not provide the permanent solution that we need. Banning the cell phone while driving would be useful, but what about the everyday situations in which we find ourselves constantly bombarded by rapid‐fire cell phone dialogue? We need to do something about America’s rudeness. If people are made to understand how irresponsible and discourteous their constant chatter is, the change we so desperately need will be sure to follow. As a start, I suggest that we all agree to follow a simple set of rules… “cell phone etiquette”, if you will. A few simple ‘dos’ and ‘don’ts’. For instance, DO leave your phone on silent as often as you can, and DON’T take a mobile call during a meeting, conference, movie, or other public gathering. DO try to maintain your distance from others while chatting, and DON’T try to multi‐task and conduct personal business (such as stopping at the bank) at the same time. And unless it’s absolutely, 100% necessary, avoid yakking while driving as well. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 90 OF 100
[phone rings again, gradually shift back to airhead voice] Speaking of yakking… I should REALLY go call Jen back! I mean, we need to figure out when we’re going shopping for her date! If you need me, I’ll be in the bathroom. You can’t miss me—I’m one of the ten girls talking on her cell phone! Melanie Goodman—“This Bowl of Rice”
GRANADA HILLS CHARTER HS, CALIFORNIA
History does not have to be mind numbing. It is a quiet day in India in the spring of 590 BC, all life hushed by the stifling sun. An old man sits beside me on the parched, narrow street. His stare probes the depths of my mind as I devour rice and scraps gathered from the ground. He is the Buddha, dressed in simple robes, but with the aura of one who is by no means simple. His stare continues even as he eats his own scant portion of brown rice. Frustrated with attempts to avert his gaze, I turn to him. ʺSo Buddha, you think youʹre better than me?ʺ He replies, ʺThe only difference between us is that you are eating a bowl of rice and I am aware that I am eating this bowl of rice.ʺ Regardless of what choices I make, I must not be a slave to my impulses, I must live deliberately. An ominous mood settles over the palace as Alexander the Great lays nearly catatonic on June 8th, 323 BC. Until these final hours he has insisted on performing strenuous meditation rituals, though this worsened his condition. I asked him why he endured the pains of his exercises. Surprisingly, he opened up to me, a mere nursemaid, and explained how he solved the intricate puzzle of the Gordian knot ten years ago. As he approached the knot, he raised his sword up over his head, then swiftly lowered it, cutting through the knot. ʺCheat! Cheat!ʺ the people cried. But they did not understand that this was the most important solution. The knot, as a metaphor for the mind, for thoughts, was not meant to be struggled with, but to be decisively cut. To be let go. Released. In Waterloo, I stumble upon a surgeon hunched over a dying body. It is a rainy June 18th, 1815, and my country, France, is at war with the British. Looking up at my sword, the doctor declares, ʺYou wonʹt need that.ʺ Confused, I ask how our side is faring. Noticeably aggravated, he continues, ʺWhat does that matter? Napoleon may lose this campaign, Wellington might win a great victory, but what have they really won or lost? You think you are sure of your convictions, but ask your fallen men now what they think of your certainty, when their most precious possession has been ripped away.ʺ This will be my final battle. In death, everything rots. Your clothes. Your body. Your beliefs. I leave my Manhattan apartment for a local movie theater in the early morning of September 11, 2002. The events of the past year cling vividly to the memories of every American. Rounding a corner, I see bright lights displaying a Charlie Chaplin matinee film festival, and remember that same sign shrouded in filth only a year before. I pay for my ticket and walk to a stiff seat in the darkness. The Great Dictator satirizes Hitler and his atrocities; an epitomic battle of good and evil; a humble soft shoe beleaguering the mighty Grendel. My spirits soar as I return home. Humor transcends. History cannot be mind numbing. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 91 OF 100
History is about more than important events in a chronological sequence, more than lists of names and dates and places. It is a story of people who have been and what they lived and died for. What we do today will dictate the lessons learned in history books of the future. The transition between what was and what will be is seamlessly held together by what is. Time cannot separate generations. When we open our minds to the past and to the present, there are infinite realms of possibility and millions of years of history and wisdom within our reach. Only then will history come alive for us, and those of the past be with us, teach us all they wish they knew. And that accumulation of knowledge and understanding, that is worth teaching to every child. Julia Rebrova—“Dang, For Short”
TAFT HS, CALIFORNIA
Original Version How should the American government treat potential terrorists here and abroad? This issue people feel is the most controversial one being discussed. Yet there is a great problem in America today. No, I am not talking about abortion, homeland security, outsourcing, welfare, torture, corruption, bribery, racial discrimination, or poverty. This problem is much more pervasive than any of us can imagine. I am talking about the state of grammar in this country. We must fight this growing trend with everything we have because people are unable to use the English language anymore. So, how might we go about solving this great problem? Well, we can derive our answer from one of the most influential pieces of legislation of our time, the Patriot Act. The act, among other things, established the Department of Homeland Security. Similarly, we need a Department of English Security in order to protect the English language. The department of English Security, or DES, would be responsible for immediately raising the level of proper English use in the United States. The DES would have to be given the same, if not greater, powers than the Dept. of Homeland Security. One important aspect of the Patriot Act is that it allows the government to screen our communication if need be, in case of any suspicious activity. Likewise, the DES could read through our emails and open our letters to investigate how we were treating our mother tongue. The DES would first correct the mistakes, mail them back to the sender, and then enact its punishment. We can therefore ensure that we are safe from those that reduce the integrity, and dare I say freedoms, of the English language. Further, the DES would be endowed with the right to screen certain groups of people for speech deficiencies. College graduates would be exempt; inner city dwellers would not. We must really target those that are most likely to hurt us through improper use of English. The more educated among us will by the very nature of the DES be safe from prosecution. However, the less educated citizens of this country may pose a threat to our grammatical well‐being. The DES will use every possible resource to preserve the English language. The Department of English Security would also be responsible for instituting a scale that would tell the public exactly how safe its language is today. The safer the language, the longer the word. When the scale goes down to articles and words like “cat” is when we are really in trouble. The SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 92 OF 100
word length meter would be updated on a daily basis so that the citizens of the United States would know exactly what the threat level is at any given time. Then, the DES will crack down with great force. An individual, if caught, would immediately be sent back to grammar school to learn the basics of subject‐verb agreement. While the school would be nowhere near as grueling as Guantánamo, it would be very similar in approach: complete immersion in the language and isolation from the negative influences of the outside world. These language abusers need to learn, once and for all, that they cannot trifle with the English language without very serious consequences. If we really want to free our language from the abuses it suffers today, we must make sure that we take the proper measures required of us. We cannot afford to be soft on those that butcher the English language and use it for their own nefarious purposes. The grammar police should be introduced immediately to save us from the bombardment we face of abused English and keep America free from these language terrorists. Revised for the State Competition Notice that in the revision, Julia begins “in the middle” as suggested at the beginning of this resource. Instead of proposing a Department of National Grammar in her second paragraph, she starts with it already in existence. This morning, the Department of American National Grammar briefed the President on the state of language in the United States. Through its monitoring of library records and subpoenas of English teachers, the Department has discovered that this nation faces a greater threat from language terrorists than ever before. Evil organizations such as UPN and Cosmopolitan Magazine have been corrupting the American language completely unnoticed for many years. The American people have finally decided to fight back—taking a page out of the Patriot Act. Since the Patriot Act has been overwhelmingly successful in combating terrorism, Congress passed the Endangered Speeches act. Just as the Patriot act set the stage for the Department of Homeland Security, we used the Endangered Speeches Act to create a Department of American National Grammar in order to protect our language. The Department of American National Grammar, or DANG for short, is responsible for correcting language offenses and persecuting the culprits that tarnish the American language. One important aspect of the Patriot Act is that it allows the government to screen our communications in case of any suspicious activity. Likewise, DANG can read through our e‐mails and open our letters to investigate how we are treating our mother tongue. DANG first corrects the mistakes, mails them back to the sender, and then adds the culprits to a watch list. We will therefore be able to monitor those who may reduce the integrity, and dare I say freedoms, of the American language; these suspicious individuals will be stopped at airports and subjected to completely random spelling tests. Further, DANG has the right to screen certain groups of people for speech deficiencies. Citizens with a lower socioeconomic status or darker skin may pose a threat to our grammatical well‐
being. The watch listed individuals will be monitored at all times to check whether they are using the word “ain’t” or confusing the words less and fewer. DANG will use every possible military and federal resource to preserve the American language, in much the same way as the Patriot Act protects us today. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 93 OF 100
The Department of American National Grammar is also responsible for a scale that tells the public exactly how safe it is from the slaughter of grammar on any particular day. Code Yellow means that some Americans are butchering the language, but that the problem at the present time is under control. Code Orange means that the country is at risk because of the increasing number of people who are watching the channel UPN. And Code Red puts the country on dire alert—that we are being bombarded by non‐native speakers actively seeking to destroy our language. Then, after a problem has been identified, DANG immediately cracks down. An individual, when caught, is sent to Alphabet Bay. Prisoners have contact with only proper American English and are prevented from spreading their slanderous practices across America. These defilers face very serious consequences: reading the dictionary for three hours daily and going back to fourth grade English class. We cannot afford to be soft on those that denigrate the American language and use it for their own nefarious purposes. Giving into the narrow‐minded protests of such organizations as the ACLU would only be helping the language terrorists triumph in their crusade against America. In short, DANG is the most important governmental initiative our country has ever undertaken—
second only to the bestest piece of legislation in the history of our nation—the Patriot Act. Ari Morcos—“Created by the Magician”
TAFT HS, CALIFORNIA
Ari’s speech demonstrates, more than most, the careful choreographing of every single significant motion. He even stutters on cue. Try delivering it and see how it feels, then aim to make your speech just as precise. Magic is created by the magician, but what creates the magician? Everyone knows how one becomes a doctor or a lawyer, but very few people know how one becomes a magician. This isn’t surprising, because, after all, the job of the magician is one that is covered in an opaque shroud of deception and mystery (Bring hands up and then down slowly with palms facing toward judges and fingers spread out). The entire profession is founded on an intricate web of secrets (Interlock fingers with palms toward audience on “web.” On “secrets” touch thumb and middle fingers on both hands and then quickly separate as if snapping). Well, that is my passion and my avocation. I am a magician. When I was six, the obsession took hold. Like every other kid in America, I received a childish magic set with a few gimmicky items such as a magnetic coin, a fake deck of cards, and the crown jewel of the collection: a magic wand. (Hold hands as if holding a wooden rod of sorts while looking lovingly at the imaginary wand). When I was eight, my parents bought me a book called the Royal Road to Card Magic… (Bring hands together in C shape with fingers toward audience and separate in an arc as if outlining the title of the novel) …that focused on the root of real magic: sleight of hand. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 94 OF 100
(Roll up sleeve on “real magic.” Flourish right hand on “sleight of hand”). Robert‐Houdin, the Father of Modern Magic, said that “To succeed as a conjurer, three things are essential—first, dexterity; second, dexterity; and third, dexterity.” (Grin at “third, dexterity.”) The general public does not understand the work that is required to become a successful magician. To achieve dexterity, you must practice hours and hours a day… (Make circular gesture with right hand) …in front of a mirror performing the same action over and over again; once real, once fake, once real, once fake… (bring right hand palm up emphasizing “once real” and then left hand palm up emphasizing fake as if you were a scale) …until even the magician himself can’t differentiate between which action was real and which action was false. I began to learn about the great magicians of the past. For example, Max Malini, one of the greatest magicians of the early 20th century, once went to a friend’s house for dinner and the family was serving a roasted pig. Malini, being a Jew, was naturally uncomfortable as he couldn’t eat the main course, so he took a cloth… (Pretend to grab a cloth about 4’ wide), …covered the pig for a moment, and whisked it away to reveal a fully cooked chicken sitting on the table ready to eat. (Pretend to cover a pig with the cloth and then whisk it away; look amazed.) This man was carrying a chicken around just in case the occasion might have occurred for him to do something magical. If that’s not devotion, I don’t know what is. Just like for Malini, everything in my life revolves around magic. My parents think that I might be spending too much time on a hobby, but they don’t understand. The plateau… (Hold right thumb against index finger high up in the air) …to which I aspire is not one of cheesy kids‐show magic or of the tedious counting tricks your Uncle Harry shows you, but one of an elegant performer revived… (At “elegant performer” spread open imaginary curtains and step through them in one wide, sweeping gesture, then at “revived” hold right hand as if holding a Shakespearean skull; shake it as if it’s brewing with power) …from the glory days of vaudeville. The level of sophistication I wish my craftsmanship to have is attained by many singers and actors, but very few magicians. Magic nowadays has the stigma of being a sideshow act designed for children. (Look disgusted). SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 95 OF 100
Instead of the suave performers of the past, current magicians dance around on stage in leather pants like clowns. Alas, magic has become a… (Stutter a bit) …novelty. However, magic is not a novelty. A singer does not wield the power… (Repeat the skull gesture; raise voice on “power”) ….of the impossible as a magician does. An actor does not make what is innately false… (Show back of hand to audience) …real. (Turn hand quickly so that palm faces audience). Only the magician can do this. Not the clown who calls himself a magician after buying a trick at a magic shop, but the magician who has practiced and studied his art for years and years—the magician who, like Malini, is ready to perform at any second… (Snap fingers on “second”) …the magician who has poise and is just as sophisticated as the English royal family… (Act sophisticated and stand up really straight in an exaggerated manner) …the magician who has an undying love for his craft. (Hold hand to heart). That is a real magician (Point hand toward judges in saw like fashion and shake once to emphasize “that”). That… (Emphasize “that” again) …magician is just as respectable as any doctor or lawyer. Magic calls for magicians like that… (Emphasize again) …and that is what I aspire to be. (Bring hand to heart and hold for a few beats after last word. Say last five words slowly and dramatically.) Dean Schaffer—“The Flying Spaghetti Monster”
TAFT HS, CALIFORNIA
Below are four versions of this speech, presented so that you can see how dramatically Dean revised it between the city and state competitions—and how he continued to tweak it all the way up to nationals. See if you can SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 96 OF 100
spot his changes and deduce why he made them. Many Decathletes become complacent with their speeches after they first draft them, not wanting to memorize changes, especially if they’ve already succeeded at a local competition. Dean’s, like Julia’s, demonstrates revision can instead be an ongoing process, one requiring an open mind and an ear for criticism. Dean won gold for his prepared speech at the city level before changing it for the state; he understood that competition grows stiffer and that changes can be necessary. Original Version In December of 2005, a federal court ruled that the Kansas School Board’s decision to make teachers teach both Intelligent Design and evolution in classes was unconstitutional. For the uninformed, the theory of Intelligent Design says that Darwin’s evolutionary theory has gaping scientific holes that do not answer why man exists or why life was created in the first place. Intelligent Design proposes that an intelligent force, not necessarily God, created life and has directed the course of evolution to the present day. In his decision report, federal judge John E. Jones III argued that teaching Intelligent Design unavoidably involves the teaching of creationism, which violates the separation of church and state enumerated in the U.S. Constitution. His decision states that Intelligent Design is merely a cover for Christian theology. While I was initially upset over Jones’s decision, I have since switched my evolutionary allegiance to a newer, more exciting theory. Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, or FSM for short, posits that all life was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster, a supreme being consisting of two eyes, two meatballs, and quote‐unquote “noodly appendages.” FSM is rapidly gaining widespread support and acceptance, despite claims that the theory is “sacrilicious.” The chosen outfit of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, “full pirate regalia,” seems to be instrumental in FSM’s growing popularity. Additionally, the beer volcano of Flying Spaghetti Monsterism’s heaven appeals to a wide variety of new converts, who call themselves Pastafarians. In addition to its surface appeal, FSM is supported by arguments that seem to be even more convincing than those of Intelligent Design. Take the following logical argument, made by self‐
proclaimed FSM prophet Bobby Henderson last December in a letter to the Kansas Board of Education: quote, “a scientist may perform a carbon‐dating process on an artifact. He finds that approximately 75% of the Carbon‐14 has decayed by electron emission to Nitrogen‐14, and infers that this artifact is approximately 10,000 years old, as the half‐life of Carbon‐14 appears to be 5,730 years. But what our scientist does not realize is that every time he makes a measurement, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage. We have numerous texts that describe in detail how this can be possible and the reasons why He does this. He is of course invisible and can pass through normal matter with ease.” In fact, it is impossible to refute any of FSM’s arguments. They are just too compelling. Take, as another example, FSM’s emphasis on pirates. Why pirates? When examining the number of pirates and the degree of global warming over time, one undoubtedly sees an inverse correlation between the two: the fewer pirates in the world, the worse global warming becomes. This concrete correlation cannot be ignored, as it is grounded in pure scientific observation. The pirate must clearly be venerated as a saint of FSMism. While Judge Jones’s decision rejected Intelligent Design on the grounds of its being undeniably linked to the Christian God, Flying Spaghetti Monsterism is in no way affiliated with Christianity. FSM already has the support of the faithful, as well as the hungry. School districts across the country are expected to fight for FSM in the upcoming months. Districts that do not are simply run SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 97 OF 100
by rationalist lunatics who inexplicably believe in the obvious fallacies of large amounts of observable evidence. Don’t you want your child to have a choice in what he learns in biology? I know I do, and I want my children to learn about Flying Spaghetti Monsterism so they can decide for themselves if they too want to be Pastafarians. How can that be wrong? Revised for Delivery at the Regional Competition In December of last year, a federal court ruled that a Pennsylvania School Board’s attempt to make teachers discuss Intelligent Design in biology classes was unconstitutional. To summarize, proponents of Intelligent Design claim that Darwin’s evolutionary theory has gaping scientific holes and cannot explain why man exists or why life was created in the first place. Intelligent Design proposes that some omnipotent force created life and has directed the course of evolution to the present day. In the court’s decision, Judge John Jones III reasoned that teaching Intelligent Design unavoidably involves teaching creationism and, therefore, violates the Constitutional separation of church and state. But despite the court’s ruling, many school districts are continuing to fight for their right to teach Intelligent Design as science. But if they succeed, I demand they also teach a new theory, one that’s just as logical and scientific as Intelligent Design. This theory, called Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, or Monsterism for short, was proposed last December by self‐proclaimed prophet Robert Henderson in a letter to the Pennsylvania School Board. Monsterism posits that all life was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster, an invisible being consisting of two eyes, two meatballs, and quote‐unquote “noodly appendages.” Monsterism is rapidly gaining widespread support, despite claims that the theory is sacrilegious. But I dispute these claims; if anything, Monsterism is nothing less than “sacridelicious.” Several of Monsterism’s appetizing beliefs, which include a lake of marinara sauce in its vision of heaven, have satiated my hunger for evolutionary truth, and I am now a proud follower of Monsterism, a Pastafarian. But in addition to its surface appeal, Monsterism is supported by evidence even more compelling than that of Intelligent Design, evidence that has convinced not only Italian‐Americans but Americans of all descents to convert from Intelligent Design to Monsterism. Consider the following argument, advanced by Prophet Henderson last December: quote, “a scientist may use carbon dating to determine that an artifact is approximately 10,000 years old. But what our scientist doesn’t realize is that every time he makes a measurement, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage,” end quote. While I now realize that Intelligent Design unquestionably has some logical gaps, I’ve found it virtually impossible to refute any of Flying Spaghetti Monsterism’s principles, and while the court rejected Intelligent Design because it is undeniably linked to Christianity, Monsterism is in no way affiliated with any organized religion. Monsterism already has a growing body of followers among all who love good Italian food, many of whom are still skeptical about Intelligent Design. To deny a theory with such social and scientific support a place in our schools would surely be ridiculous. But if what happened to Intelligent Design serves as any precedent, angry scientists Monsterism will soon emerge to deny the validity and truth of Monsterism. I ask you: as concerned parents, don’t you want your children to be able to make informed decisions about the evolution of life? I know I would, and when I have kids, I’ll demand they learn about Monsterism so they too can decide for themselves if they want to become Pastafarians like me. After all, Monsterism really is a more sensible and more scientific alternative to evolution than Intelligent Design. I implore you—
don’t take the freedom to choose Flying Spaghetti Monsterism away from the children of America SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 98 OF 100
Revised for the State Competition In the beginning, the Flying Spaghetti Monster created life, and it was tasty. Or at least that’s how Oregon State University graduate and self‐proclaimed prophet Robert Henderson believes it happened. Last December, Henderson proposed a new theory as an alternative to Darwin’s evolution—Flying Spaghetti Monsterism. Much like the similar theory of Intelligent Design, Monsterism posits that life forms are far too complex and sophisticated to have developed from random evolutionary chance alone; some omnipotent force must have controlled the process. According to the gospel of Monsterism, all life was created by the Spaghetti Monster, an invisible being consisting of two eyes, two meatballs, and quote‐unquote “noodly appendages.” Monsterism is rapidly gaining widespread support, despite claims that the theory is sacrilegious. But I dispute these claims; if anything, Monsterism is nothing less than “sacridelicious.” Monsterism’s appetizing beliefs, which include a lake of marinara sauce in its vision of heaven, have satiated my hunger for evolutionary truth, and I am now a proud follower of Monsterism, a Pastafarian. But in addition to its surface appeal, Monsterism is supported by evidence that is at least as compelling as that of Intelligent Design, evidence that has convinced not only Italian‐Americans but Americans of all descents to convert from Darwinism to Monsterism. Consider, for example, the human eye. Both Monsterism and Intelligent Design point out that eye is far too complicated to have been created by random genetic mutations and natural selection, as was proposed by Darwin. Monsterism is a response to this obvious hole in classic evolutionary theory: the Flying Spaghetti Monster’s Noodly Appendages are both delicate and maneuverable, the perfect instruments for the molding of life. Over time, the Spaghetti Monster used His Noodles to meticulously and lovingly sculpt what has become the eye. Evidence of His design can even be seen in the blueprint of life itself: DNA. The structure of the DNA molecule is an intricate double helix shape. But have you ever examined a single strand of DNA? Bears an awfully close resemblance to spaghetti, doesn’t it? While DNA may not be as tasty as pasta, this structural resemblance is a self‐evident indication of both the Spaghetti Monster’s existence and His active role in shaping anatomical structure. Much like proponents of Intelligent Design, followers of Monsterism demand that all scientifically viable theories of evolution be taught in public schools—not just Darwin’s version. After all, Darwin’s theory is only a theory, not proven fact. Monsterism, Intelligent Design, and Darwinism, therefore, should all receive equal time and equal treatment in the classroom. Thousands of believers, including members of a Kansas School Board, have signed prophet Henderson’s online petition in support of Monsterism’s educational inclusion. To deny a theory with such scientific and social support a place in our schools would surely be ridiculous. Unfortunately, I suspect that angry, crackpot scientists with backwards and conservative views will soon emerge to deny the validity and obvious truth of Monsterism, much as they have already tried to discredit Intelligent Design. Although these scientists could never prove that the Flying Spaghetti Monster does not, in fact, exist, they will surely attempt to deprive our youth of the balanced education and diet they deserve. I ask you: as concerned parents, don’t you want your children to be able to make informed decisions about the evolution of life? I know I would, and when I have kids, I’ll demand they learn about Monsterism so they too can decide for themselves if they want to become Pastafarians like me. I implore you—don’t take the freedom to choose Flying Spaghetti Monsterism away from the children of America. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 99 OF 100
Revised for the National Competition In the beginning, the Flying Spaghetti Monster created life, and it was tasty. Or at least that’s how Oregon State University graduate and self‐proclaimed prophet Robert Henderson believes it happened. Last December, Henderson proposed a new alternative to Darwin’s evolutionary theory—Flying Spaghetti Monsterism. Much like the similar theory of Intelligent Design, Monsterism posits that life forms are far too sophisticated to have developed from random evolutionary chance alone; some omnipotent force must have controlled the process. According to the gospel of Monsterism, all life was created by the Spaghetti Monster, an invisible being consisting of two eyes, two meatballs, and quote‐unquote “noodly appendages.” Monsterism is rapidly gaining widespread support, despite claims that the theory is sacrilegious. But, nonsense! If anything, Monsterism is nothing less than “sacridelicious.” Monsterism’s appetizing beliefs, which include a lake of marinara sauce in its vision of heaven, have satiated my hunger for evolutionary truth, and I am now a proud follower of Monsterism, a Pastafarian. But in addition to its surface appeal, Monsterism is supported by evidence at least as compelling as that of Intelligent Design, evidence that has convinced not only Italian‐Americans but Americans of all descents to convert from Darwinism to Monsterism. Consider, for example, the human eye. Both Monsterism and Intelligent Design point out that the eye is far too complicated to be the result of natural selection, as Darwin proposed. Monsterism is a response to this gaping scientific hole: the Flying Spaghetti Monster’s Noodly Appendages are both delicate and maneuverable, perfect for the molding of life. Over time, the Spaghetti Monster used His Noodles to meticulously and lovingly sculpt what has become the eye. Evidence of His design can even be seen in the blueprint of life itself: DNA. The structure of the DNA molecule is an intricate double helix, but have you ever examined a single strand of DNA? Bears a striking resemblance to spaghetti, doesn’t it? But while DNA may not be as tasty as pasta, this similarity is clear proof of both the Spaghetti Monster’s existence and His active role in shaping anatomical structure. Much like proponents of Intelligent Design, Pastafarians demand that all scientifically viable theories of evolution be taught in public schools—not just Darwin’s version. After all, Darwin’s theory is only a theory, not proven fact. Intelligent Design, Darwinism, and Monsterism, therefore, must all receive equal time and equal treatment in the classroom. Thousands of believers, including members of the Kansas and Pennsylvania School Boards, have already signed prophet Henderson’s online petition in support of Monsterism’s educational inclusion. To deny a theory with such scientific and social support a place in our schools would surely be ridiculous. Unfortunately, I suspect that angry, crackpot scientists with backwards and conservative views will soon emerge to deny the validity and obvious truth of Monsterism, much as they have already tried to discredit Intelligent Design. These heretics will surely attempt to deprive our youth of the balanced education and diet they deserve. We must act now if we are to preserve the educational equality and integrity of this country. I implore you—we must protect the freedom to choose Flying Spaghetti Monsterism for the children of America. SPEECH RESOURCE
PAGE 100 OF 100
About the Authors Daniel Berdichevsky ([email protected]) founded DemiDec after winning the national Academic Decathlon and receiving a jaywalking ticket from a police officer who had not previously arrested him. Since then, he has dropped out of Harvard, created the World Scholar’s Cup, ghostwritten for the UN Secretary‐General, mistaken a kangaroo for a puppy, and fled the nation of Montenegro. His destruction of an American gas station had no lasting consequences. Daniel received a Master’s in Public Policy from Harvard University. He no longer lives in a South Korean shopping mall. For details, check out his blog at www.unlikelyalpaca.com. Daniel with his guardian alpacas, which are about to journey from Peru to Boston. Robert Pazornik ([email protected]) once lived for six months with Daniel in Silicon Valley, where they worked together to start a poorly‐
named venture fund for Casio. The consummate swingman, Robert has run the table at DemiDec, playing every role from poetry resource writer to typist. At VentureNova, he handled backend programming and served as an emissary to the Generation X start‐up community. He also demonstrated a keen ability to off‐road in urban San Jose and to sneak into private dinner parties. Robert received over 30
parking tickets in three
months.
Robert is now the CEO of his own start‐up, Licketyship, which specializes in rapid delivery of consumer purchases. He invites feedback and beta testers (www.licketyship.com.)