Helplessly Hoping?

A debate was started today which sought to appraise the speeches of the late Winston Churchill. There is little doubt that his speeches achieved their desired effect. At a time when this country was at its lowest ebb, he succeeded in rallying the people when there was truthfully very little left in the tank.

In the politics of today, I struggle to think of any speaker who motivates me. A kind of bland veil seems to have descended over public life in which the sound bite has to take precedence over substance. It has not always been like this. There was a time when an aspiring politician would first make his name with a speech in the Commons. With political spin and political gamesmanship there is now no need to be good on your feet.

At school, I attended a debating society which has continued to serve me well. Learning the art of speaking to a large group is hugely important. In today's micro-managed world, I would argue that this is now more important than ever. Of course, the prerequisites for any aspiring speakers are a good command of their language and an ability to demand the attention of their audience with the authority and passion of their delivery.

Great speakers from history vary enormously in their delivery. Whatever his faults in ideology, Hitler was an orator of the highest class. Try and listen to any of his rousing speeches at the Nazi rallies and remain unmoved. Even though he speaks in a language which I don't speak, he has my absolute attention. By contrast, Gandhi was just about the exact opposite. Softly spoken, this little man spoke with a measured conviction which just drew you in. I suspect that his belief in what he stood for underpinned his style. Either way, it is worth having a listen to any of his speeches. His training as a barrister served him well because he spoke with great simplicity and knew how to best to spread his message.

Despite his media depiction as a bit of a buffoon, the acting past of Ronald Reagan was his trump card. He had that unique ability to give gravitas to a speech in just the right places when needed. For my money his real gift was his humour. This he used to great effect to defuse his audience and get them on side. He was also self effacing which never goes amiss with an audience. Like Gandhi, Reagan plumped for the soft delivery to exert his desired effect. His more illustrious predecessor John F Kennedy was definitely more in the loud camp. He was obviously a very able speaker and used his natural confidence very wisely.

The great orators date from the time of Demosthenes in Ancient Greece but the styles have probably changed very little over the years. Those who can't control their passion tend to be louder and those who can tend to be softer. On that basis, Dr. Martin Luther King evidently had trouble controlling his passion. He remains the finest speaker I have ever heard. I could never tire of listening to him. This man was the great motivator for whom hundreds of thousands would understandably turn up. His conviction was frightening and I can't imagine anybody else being able to come near to it. Like Gandhi, he espoused the concept of peaceful protest. Although his famous dream is not yet fully realised, it is well on the way.

I can but hope that someone with a fraction of their conviction will soon appear in our public life. Speakers Corner in London is now little more than a tourist landmark although I'm aware that there are still those who exercise their right to free speech. This is how people like Lenin started and changed their world so much. If we are to see a real change in our public life, there has never been a greater need for a conviction politician. The peers of Churchill such as Nye Bevan were nearly all highly skilled orators who could take an audience by the scruff of their neck and get their message across. By contrast we have the insipid triumvirate of Cameron, Clegg and Milliband. I sit here helplessly hoping for something better. I can but hope..