Roncalli Communications, Inc

Home

Contact Shosky

Contact Carmel

Comments? Suggestions?

An Interview with Roy A. Bernardi: "The Dynamics of Public Speaking”

Roy A. Bernardi has served as the mayor of Syracuse, New York, and, most recently, as the deputy secretary for the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. He is currently a vice president of CGI in Fairfax, Virginia.

Questions are asked by John Shosky.

Q: Welcome and thanks for this interview.

RB: It’s a pleasure.

Q: You are internationally regarded as a fine public speaker. In fact, I rank you up there with Ronald Reagan and Tony Blair. 

RB: That’s very kind. 

Q: Do you remember your first speech?

RB: Sure, it was in high school. It was a contest for a prize in public speaking. We started with eight speakers and I made the final two, but didn’t win. I was very influenced by President John F. Kennedy’s speaking style. So in that contest I tried to copy it. I even included his accent. I thought he had a wonderful style of speaking, so confident and credible. In my final speech I got nervous and lost my train of thought. I might have won otherwise.

It was a great experience getting up in front of an audience, very rewarding. I really enjoyed the process of preparation and the idea of sharing information with an audience. But I didn’t know what I was doing.

In college I took a speech class and that was when I learned the basics. 

Later in life I was often asked to speak. And I learned to love speaking. As I said, I really liked preparing for speeches. When I entered politics I was asked to speak more often. These were important speeches so I learned to prepare even more. I would write out my speeches, sometimes with a bit of help, and I worked to become very prepared before each speech. When I spoke, I didn’t necessarily follow my written speech. Yet, I always wrote out the speech beforehand so that I knew what I wanted to say and how I wanted to say it.

Speaking opportunities multiplied when I ran for mayor. I spoke all the time. That’s when I learned you had to be concise, understandable, and persuasive. You had to speak to an audience in a particular way. You had to be one of them, not apart. And you had to have a vision about what it means to run a city and what the future would look like for the city. People wanted real, believable answers for problems of urban blight, crime, education, and the city’s infrastructure. And you had to give them clear, straightforward, and workable solutions.

And I learned that a speech is really about the audience. So I wanted them to walk away thinking that their time was well spent. I wanted any speaking event to be useful and helpful for the audience.

Q: How long is a good speech?

RB: Depending on the event, a speech should be no longer than 15-20 minutes. If you speak for longer you may lose the audience. 

If you have to speak longer I’ve found you can keep an audience interested with a good story, a strong story they don’t know. Everyone has life experiences. People like to know what other people do. And they can identify with certain life experiences we all share: growing up, growing older, losing friends, failing in love, marriage, parenting, going to work, and so on. The right kind of story can make the minutes pass without the audience suffering.

Q: As mayor you often spoke before small groups. As a national housing leader you often spoke to thousands of people. What differences in approach do you have based on audience size? 

RB: Well, you have to make adjustments. Size of the audience often determines the way you speak and your entire approach to a speech. For example, if the group is small, you have to make eye contact with everyone. Even if you make eye contact with 95 percent of a small audience it is not enough. You have to look each and every person in the eye. They have to feel an intimate connection with you. For a larger audience you can’t look at everyone individually, so you have to look at sections of the audience, left, then right, then left again, trying to include everyone you can and leaving no one out, if possible. 

I also speak slower to a larger audience. It is better to go too slow than too fast. An audience doesn’t want to be rushed.

Delivery can never degenerate into monotone. You have to know where you want to raise your voice or increase the pace. 

Don’t grip the podium. Keep your hands relaxed at your side or on the center of the podium. 

Keep your chin up slightly. Don’t let the audience see the top of your head. You want eye contact.

I am more likely to use a visible manuscript with a larger audience, speaking one sentence and then looking at the next sentence as I move my head from left to right. I then speak the new sentence and then grab the next one when I look back right to left. 

Q: Do you still get nervous?

RB: Sure. But I have it under control. I am now very comfortable as a speaker.

Q: What are you trying to do with a speech?

RB: The important thing is that you really have to move the audience. And that means you have to understand them. You have to know their background. You have to share with them meaningful facts, statistics, and history. You have to have a vision about where we go from this day forward, from today into the future. The vision has to be credible, not too far out. There must be depth behind it. You really have to know the subject matter. But the audience can’t be overwhelmed. You have to persuade them, not bludgeon them.

Q: What do you think about during a speech?

RB: When I am up at the podium I am constantly aware of the audience. I want to start with a good impression. So I have good posture. I look at them. In the first couple of minutes I try to make a light joke about something. I mention the locale. I talk about a few people by name. I talk about the important work of the organization. I compliment valuable efforts. That’s where the research comes in. 

Then, as the speech progresses, I receive their feedback. I adapt. I adjust my rate. I look for a good use of a pregnant pause for emphasis. I give them a structure so they can easily follow my remarks. And I don’t deliver my speech like I am reading it. I want to talk with them, not talk at them. 

I want to speak with knowledge. I want them to know that I understand the issue very well. 

I use examples.

And, in a speech, I like to tell a story.

And I speak with conviction and passion.

If you can give a speech with conviction and vision then the audience begins to get passionate too. The audience can relate to your passion.

The speech must rise to the level of persuasion. It must move the audience. It must touch them in some way. 

I also speak from the heart. I want them to remember the speech. So I want them to know that my views are authentic and heart-felt. The worse thing in the world is to sit in an audience and think someone is phony. Whether people agree with me or not, I want them to know that I have conviction and passion.

I like to shape my message around one idea or a meaningful quotation.

Q: You have given speeches in Spanish. What would you recommend to people doing a public speech in a second language?

RB: I would recommend against giving a large portion of the speech in another language unless the speaker is comfortable with that language. Maybe just say a few words. Show that you care about the language and the audience. But don’t do this for too long because it might make the audience uncomfortable. But if you do have a comfortable facility, then you can go farther, maybe even to the end. For me, the decision rule is this: the audience understands you and they are willing to listen to you speak in another language. 

By the way, I would recommend speaking in the same dialect as the audience, if you can. My Spanish reflects my education in Mexico. So I have to think about changes in dialect that might undermine my authenticity as a speaker. Dialect is a tricky problem. 

Q: I presume you’ve thought about good and bad speakers. Who are some of the best you’ve seen?

RB: John Kennedy still is among the best for me. I loved his confidence, his words, the way he opened up your thinking. He made you realize the power of the right words. He also had a great way of making difficult problems more understandable…that’s not easy to do.

I also liked Ronald Reagan. I heard him speak a number of times. He always made each person in the audience feel that he spoke right to them. He was comfortable, believable, clear, and strong. He projected strength. He knew what to do as a speaker. That made it easy for him to explain his vision. It helped the audience develop trust and to follow him.

I also liked Hubert H. Humphrey, the “Happy Warrior.” He was exciting as a speaker. He projected joy and exuberance. I could contrast him with Richard Nixon, who didn’t have the same warmth or comfort.

Obviously, Bill Clinton and Barak Obama are good at what they do. I think George Herbert Walker Bush and George W. Bush are better speakers than generally recognized. They have a West Texas style of speaking that masks their ability behind the folksy approach.

Q: What advice would you give someone learning about public speaking?

RB: Even if you don’t have a lot of ability yet, prepare well before an event. Take the time to practice. Record yourself. Try to become conversational. Enunciate. When you practice learn to say every syllable, every word. Remember, people have to understand you. Employ repetition. That helps an audience. You can see the effectiveness of repetition in the Bible. Through your words bring the audience together. And remember, nothing is more important than the beginning and the end of the speech. Always end with a comparison. Let people know you care about them. And be respectful. Thank them for their time.

Sure, maybe you won’t be great immediately. But you can be pretty good if you prepare in the right way.

####

“Tools of the Trade”

When I first started out as a speechwriter, I worked with a team of veteran writers.  I noticed that the first action was to check out my bookcase, followed by comments and questions:  “Where did you get this?  Why don’t you have that?”  “You can’t be serious!”  Finally, I asked about the scrutiny.  “We want to know what you use to construct your speeches.”  In fact, that scrutiny is part of the tradition…speechwriters always want to know about the books and other sources of information used by colleagues or competitors.  Upon entering an office, speechwriters go right for the bookcase, a gravitational pull.  True, the resources don’t tell the whole story by any means.  Good writers free themselves from dependence on certain kinds of resources early on.  But the books begin to tell you something about the learning process and the background a writer brings to a project.

So, for those just starting out, or for those who feel that gravitational pull, let me suggest some tools of the trade.

1.  Style Manuals.
Good speechwriters are first and foremost writers.  Style manuals are required tools.  Several should be in your library.  They should be read cover to cover, encyclopedically.  The best one is also one of the shortest, The Elements of Style by William Strunk and E.B. White.  Less than 80 pages, this book get right to it, instantly improving your style.  No one should be without it.  The big manuals from the University of Chicago, the American Psychological Association, or the Modern Language Association should also be at hand.  I have found some of the older style books useful, especially Sir Ernest Gowers’ The Complete Plain Words or Henry Fowler’s Modern English Usage Dictionary.

2.  Dictionaries.
Words have jobs.  They are the tools in the toolbox.  Expanding word choice in constructing a speech means there are more tools available.  You may still rely on the same words over and over again, the same hammer and saw, but it helps to have tools that fit every job.  A standard dictionary is a start.  But over time you may want to add specialized dictionaries, maybe even consider some version of the Oxford English Dictionary (very helpful, that).

3.  Books of Quotations.
Every American speechwriter I know has Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations sitting on the shelf.  It is a sentinel, guarding the office.  This vast compendium of quotations is simply a “must-have.”  But because it is so well known, any of the quotations are well known and well used, so its value is limited because of familiarity.  I’ve watched speechwriters in the back of the room look at each other when a “Bartlett’s” is used, almost with sympathy because the speaker was so obvious.  So you will need to supplement that volume with others like The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Quotations or George Seldes’ The Great Thoughts, which give you more variety and less overlap with other such books.  There is also a book of anecdotes by James Humes, speechwriter for several U.S. Presidents.  It is the Speaker’s Treasury of Anecdotes about the Famous.  This is a classic (my copy fell apart years ago), designed to provide introductions and conclusions.

I’ve noticed that speechwriters rely less and less on this type of book over time.  But the hope of a chestnut makes every writer buy and read quotation books, almost as if the volumes represent an insurance policy against writer’s block or lack of inspiration.

4.  Collected Speeches
Reading speeches helps develop a certain style of writing for what one of those veterans called “the mind’s ear.”  Good speech are oral masterpieces, not necessarily acceptable on paper for visual inspection (remember that when editing a speech).  You have to hear the words, not look at them.  A collection of effective speeches can be a helpful guide to this type of writing.  There are many, many great collections out there.  Here is a partial list, selected because the speeches are good oral demonstrations of the craft:  Chamber’s Book of Speeches, Simon Heffer’s Great British Speeches, Brian MacArthur’s The Penguin Book of Historical Speeches, and William Safire’s Lend Me Your Ears.  For me, the best one of all is MacArthur’s The Penguin Book of Twentieth-Century Speeches.  I carry this book with me everywhere, on every assignment, from Middle America to Central Africa.  Also, there is an ancient collection, a real antique if you can find it.  It is called Modern Eloquence, edited by Thomas B. Reed.  Published in 1903, it is an outstanding collection of hundreds of speeches, lectures, after dinner remarks, and anecdotes.  If you ever find it, buy it at whatever the cost.  There are also some useful collections of speeches by particular speakers, such as Winston Churchill’s Blood, Toil, Tears, and Sweat, edited by David Cannadine (a similar collection titled Never Give In is now available from Churchill’s grandson); Mario Cuomo’s More Than Words; John Kennedy’s Let Every Nation Know, edited by Robert Dallek and Terry Golway; Ronald Reagan’s Speaking My Mind; and Margaret Thatcher’s The Collected Speeches, edited by Robin Harris.

The rapid advent of Barak Obama has already produced a number of books with his speeches.  I recommend two of them:  Henry Russell’s The Politics of Hope” and Penguin’s Barak Obama: The Inaugural Address.”

There is also a collection of pre-prime minister speeches by Gordon Brown, Moving Britain Forward.

5.  Examine Rhetorical Handbooks.
The ancient Greek and Roman rhetoricians have much to teach us.  In their time, public speeches were like sporting events, attracting thousands of listeners and garnering much analysis and discussion.  The rhetorical handbooks compiled a number of techniques for public speaking.  The speeches by Isocrates, Demosthenes, or Cicero demonstrate how to use them.  If you want to find out more, perhaps you could turn to any of the books by the legendary George A. Kennedy, such as The Art of Persuasion in Greece or A New History of Classical Rhetoric.  A more recent book that might be extremely helpful is Joy Connolly’s The State of Speech, which discusses rhetoric and political though in ancient Rome.

6.  Listen to “The Archers”
I know, this is the last bit of advice you’d expect to find in Total Politics.  But there is something important in that advice.  One old speechwriter who worked in radio told me that writing for listening was the key to that medium.  The words had to work with the imagination to paint pictures in the mind, to help people “see through words.”  He told me to buy some old radio programs and listen to how the words work.  So I did.  I bought some old radio programs by Jack Benny.  What a revelation!!!  These were not books on tape, with famous readers reading prose for the eye.  These were programs constructed for the ear, presented for the “mind’s ear.”  I noticed my speechwriting improved dramatically with this type of resource.  For example, pick up a copy of the BBC’s recent publication, From Our Own Correspondent, edited by Tony Grant.  Then, in private, read these scripts out loud.  You begin to see the difference.  Or listen to radio programs like “The Archers.”

7.  Consult Public Speaking Books
Some books have good discussion of delivery and putting everything together.  Peggy Noonan’s On Speaking Well is my choice as the best.  However, Humes’ Speak like Churchill, Stand like Lincoln is also very good and widely available.  I am extremely impressed with a straightforward approach by Jeanette and Roy Henderson, There’s No Such Thing as Public Speaking, which argues for a conversational style.  For simple motivational style, there is Nick Morgan’s Give Your Speech, Change the World.  This is a good book for a business audience.

I was fortunate to start my career with those experienced speechwriters.  They were full of wisdom (which is one way to put it).  They often spoke of the dynamics of speechwriting with reverence, because they understood that a successful speech involved more than just standing up and reading words.  An effective speech could change attitudes and motivate action.  A speech was almost sacred.  It could reach into the soul and change each person in the audience, providing a memorable moment that did alter the course of events.  Because a great speech could be so powerful, the process itself deserved respect and consideration.  They demanded that I learn my craft and practice it with professionalism.  Acquiring and understanding the tools of the trade was part of the learning process, an apprenticeship that was conducted under the scrutiny of the White House, the national and international press, and Washington insiders.  But no audience was tougher than my teachers, those boisterous and brutal speechwriters, real craftsmen of an illustrious and indispensable trade, usually conducted in the background with anxious humility.  Every day, with every speech, I try to remember their advice.

"Traits of the Greats"

Most speeches, the vast majority, are instantly forgettable. But some speeches really do change the world. They endure, inspiring new generations of speakers and thinkers. How? Well, a number of ways. Great speeches may capture a moment in time. Some visionary comments move a debate or a nation forward. Landmark speeches articulate important ideas. And some great speeches touch the heart with authentic humanity, often expressing appropriate joy or grief. These speeches stand apart. They are worthy of comment and acute examination. Great speeches have historical value, becoming a referential benchmark. Great speeches are examples of what can be done when the right words are expressed at a crucial moment. So I applaud those who remind us of the power of public speaking. For example, over a two week period in July 2007, the Guardian generously offered fourteen of the greatest speeches of the 20th Century in booklet form. These speeches are now online at http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/series/greatspeeches. In July of 2008, the Independent ranked the 25 greatest political speeches of all time at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2446608/%20Top-25-political-speeches-of-all-time.html. These rankings reproduce the words themselves, and offer short biographical background of the speakers and the history behind the events. But we should do more to examine the techniques or traits that made the speech memorable. Great speeches achieve a sort of immortality because they change the course of history. We can see how they do this through identification of common elements. Here are a few Traits of the Greats. 1. Vision. Great speeches almost always have a vision of the future. They compare a known present with a possible future. Those that persuasively articulate a better future help people visualize, then actualize, change. One of the most famous examples is Ronald Reagan’s constant reference to the “Shining City on the Hill,” a future where America remains a beacon of hope for the world. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., had a dream he shared with others: “With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood.” Margaret Thatcher spoke at Brighton in 1975 of freedom of choice and personal fulfillment: “Let me give you my vision: a man’s right to work as he will, to spend what he earns, to own property, to have the State as servant and not as master – these are the British inheritance.” When George Herbert Walker Bush was criticized for not having a vision, the “vision thing” became more than an issue. Its absence was fatal. 2. Conviction. Great speakers believe in their vision. President Kennedy said “We will pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” That is conviction. Prime Minister Thatcher said “The lady’s not for turning.” That is what conviction sounds like. There is no doubt, just confident articulation of direction and purpose. Conviction is not to be confused with stubbornness or short-sightedness. 3. Hope. President Reagan instructed his speechwriters to make his words uplifting, to give people hope, to help them believe that the future could be better. Time and again, audiences identify with those who offer a positive message of hope. One of the most stunning examples was by Pope John Paul II in Czetochowa in 1983, when he spoke to the large audience in a kind of code, comparing Our Lady of Jasna Gora to Poland itself: “You who have been given to us by Providence for the defense of the Polish nation, accept this evening this call of the Polish youth together with this Polish Pope, and help us to persevere in hope!” Remember the idealistic hope offered by Woodrow Wilson in fighting for America’s involvement in the League of Nations. Tony Blair spoke with a strong emphasis on hope and empowerment in his speeches. So did Barak Obama in his presidential campaign. 4. Unity. Great speeches heal division. Great speeches unite. They use the power of speech as action. Speeches that fragment the audience with the words of class warfare, the use of economic or ethnic division, or enflame an audience with vile hatred are dangerous and ultimately self-defeating. Such an approach does not win elections anymore in American politics and it is certainly not sustainable in an 21st Century election in the United Kingdom. Nelson Mandela understood this when he said in his inaugural address in 1994 that “We must therefore act together as a united people, for national reconciliation, for nation building, for the birth of a new world.” That language contains the inclusion and respect that flows from unifying words. In my mind, the template for healing division is a phrase once used by the Oxford philosopher Derek Parfit: “What we together do.” Every great speech is about what we could do together – all of us. No one can be expendable. No one can, or should, be left out. 5. Collective assent. Great speeches make the speaker the “voice of collective assent.” This means that the speaker gives voice to the hopes, aspirations, and dreams of the audience, becoming the oracle of the words that others would say, if they could. I believe this is the underlying greatness of Pericles “Funeral Oration” or Abraham Lincoln’s “Gettysburg Address” or President Mandela’s wonderful inaugural address. Collective assent can happen even with a hostile crowd. If you listen to a tape of Neil Kinnock’s remarks at Bournemouth in 1985, you can actually hear that audience’s affirmation when he says “You can’t play politics with people’s jobs and with people’s services or with their homes.” He becomes one with, in his own words, “The voice of the real people with real needs.” In the dark hours of May 1940, Winston Churchill did become the voice of the people in the “Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat” speech or later in June of that year, when he rallied the nation for the Battle of Britain, predicting this would be “Their finest hour.” 6. Principle. Great speeches advocate equality, dignity and respect. They stand for moral purpose and embody moral clarity. There is a feeling expressed among certain historians that a great speech can emerge from even the most difficult situations, if the remarks are grounded in universal principles. Time and circumstance change, but the principles remain. A profound, moving example of this use of morality and articulation of rights is the speech Vaclav Havel gave on New Year’s Day in 1990. Contrasting the climate of lies and violence under communism in Czechoslovakia with the expectations of a society ruled by law and respect for human rights, he spoke of the need for truth in speech, of the need to create a “moral atmosphere,” of a country that emphasized responsibility, freedom, and democracy. And that speech had a unifying theme of moral conduct, overtly referencing two great figures in Czech history: Tomas Masaryk and Comenius. 7. Action. Great speeches inspire action. Probably no one did this more effectively than Theodore Roosevelt. His speeches about “The Strenuous Life” or the “Man in the Arena” are models about personal responsibility and political participation. Roosevelt argued that each person could make a difference, but he or she had to try, to take a risk, to enter the arena and work for the betterment of others. That action can be non-violence, as articulated by Mahatma Gandhi, educator and theologian Dr. Benjamin Elijah Mays, or his Morehouse College student, Dr. King. The power of action is part of Robert Kennedy’s moving speech at the University of Capetown in 1966: “Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.” 8. Compress the message. All great speeches are known by a phrase that condenses the message and the entire argument of the speech. In 1953, Kwame Nkrumah spoke of Ghana’s liberation as “The motion of destiny.” John Kennedy’s “Ich bin ein Berliner’ is a fantastic display of one sentence expressing the whole point of the speech. Earl Spencer’s comment about Princess Diana as “The most hunted person of the modern age” abbreviates the speech in a haunting sentence. And we can’t forget Reagan’s demand in 1987, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” These elements of great speeches deserve notice. They are an important part of what makes a speech memorable. While they have a sort of immortality, great speeches are human creations, the product of the speakers and their writers, a skillful triumph over cliche and dreary prose. We remember them because they will not let us forget. Great speeches demand to be heard. And, as current interest in these speeches demonstrates, we still seem to be listening. #### Ronald Reagan