|
Handout One: Thesis Development
in Impromptu Speaking
Dr. Andrew Wood, Communication Studies
 There
is no secret to impromptu speaking, but there are some
techniques that are worth learning if you plan to compete
on the national level with this event. This handout
is designed to introduce you to a philosophy that stresses
both the educational and competitive aspects of impromptu
speaking through a discussion of how you can develop
a thought-provoking thesis statement which will guide
you through your speeches. We begin with this core belief:
the best impromptu speaking reveals useful insight about
the human condition. This approach is somewhat different
than the traditional strategy used to succeed in impromptu
speaking. Most of your colleagues from other schools
have been taught that success in this event requires
you to memorize several obscure and somewhat heady paragraphs
that can be used to connect a speech to virtually any
topic. To inexperienced competitors (and, sadly, a few
judges) this approach is impressive. However, if you've
competed in this event for a while, the subtle sound
of a 'can' being opened almost always accompanies this
style of impromptu speaking. We can do better.
Topic Matrix
How then do we learn to speak on virtually any quotation
without canning? First, before you even think about
competing, conduct an inventory of what you know. Experienced
impromptu speakers are aware of their strengths and
weaknesses. They constantly attempt to expand on those
areas in which they are comfortable and build areas
about which they know little. It all starts with a topic
matrix. Start working on yours with the space provided
below. Down the first column, write major topic areas
such as "politics," "sports," "modern
dance," "literature," etc. Remember that
these areas should be fairly broad, yet you should be
able to draw specific examples from them and share them
with an audience. In each row to the right of each topic
area, you'll note that there are three fields; within
them, list examples from your topic area about which
you could speak for about one minute.
|
|
Having completed your topic matrix, your next goal
is to expand the number of rows and columns. Can you
speak about more topics more deeply? Your ability to
sift through your brain's database is a necessary skill
in impromptu speaking. Note: your goal is NOT to memorize
these examples, or to memorize anything else. In this
event, it's not ethical; moreover, it's not necessary.
This exercise is merely designed to provide an assessment
of your "memory bank." (The first row shows
you what I mean. Notice that each topic area should
have at least three specific examples.)
Interpreting the Quotation: Playing the Game of
Threes
One you have begun to outline your knowledge base,
you have mastered an essential skill in impromptu speaking.
It is necessary to know first what you know.
After that, you should begin to assess what you believe.
Impromptu speaking is concerned primarily with questions
of value - what is good and best, what is true about
human nature? Even the most banal quotations -- at heart
-- reveal a stance on a significant debate about management
and purposes of our lives.
 Your
task, therefore, is to learn the art of interpretation
so that you can dig deeply past the surface level meanings
of a quotation to unpack and reveal the underlying theme.
Is there only one useful truth about any given quotation?
You've probably guessed, "no," and you're
right. Within seven minutes, it's pretty hard to provide
the ultimate truth about anything. Instead, you strive
to provide an informative and plausible set of arguments
designed to uphold the claim that your interpretation
about the quotation is best.
How, then, can you dig into a quotation and reveal a
fundamental statement about human nature if you only
have two minutes (or less) to prepare a five (or more)
minute speech? The answer may be found when you play
the game of threes. This approach toward argumentation
assumes that even the most complicated quotations can
be boiled down to a simple claim about some value -
a three-word phrase. The purpose of this exercise is
to help you decide quickly what you believe to be true.
If it's a simple phrase, you will more easily remember
it and return to it in case the rush of a particular
speech gets a bit confusing. In other words, at any
point you're wondering, "what am I doing here?"
You can recall, "the point of this speech is to
prove a simple claim about the human condition. These
examples will support these arguments as long as they
support my three-word thesis."
Here's an example of how the game of threes can help
you isolate a useful meaning from a potentially unwieldy
quotation. The quotation is, "Almost everything
comes from nothing," by Frederic Amiel. What do
you do with an abstraction like that? Your goal is to
isolate a human value and connect it to a statement
of belief that is debatable. Thus, I might distill Amiel's
claim into the following thesis: "Persistence is
good."
Sure, it's a simplistic claim. You might wish to "dress
it up" a bit for your audience. But at the heart
of every clever statement and turn-of-phrase must be
a simple idea - one that is convincing because
of its elegance. Let's explore how one might develop
this three-word thesis. In the game of threes, you analyze
a quotation, first, from the perspective of a value.
All of us tend to evaluate the world from a constellation
of abstractions that are meaningful to us. I might view
the world and its people from the perspective of "courage,"
"vision," and "compassion." You
might think that "discipline," "power,"
and "risk" are primary lenses for viewing
our experiences in the world. While we all don't share
the same value system, most of us can at least understand
the implicit debate found in a word like "courage."
To some, courage is a primary means to "prove ourselves."
To others courage is a foolhardy, unnecessary extravagance.
Who knows? But most of your audience members are aware
that courage plays a role in many people's value systems.
So, as a speaker, I selected a value, "persistence,"
that appears to motivate the quotation "Almost
everything comes from nothing." You might have
selected the concept, "courage," or "love,"
and you could make a convincing case that such a value
is more useful, more insightful, than "persistence."
But within two minutes, you should work from a value
system with which you're most comfortable. I've thought
a fair amount about the value of persistence, and I've
chosen to begin with that concept. At this point, I've
crystallized a somewhat abstract quotation down to a
discussion of a human value that can be debated. At
this point, it's necessary to state a specific claim
that will be justified throughout the speech. In short,
you must answer two questions:
- What does this quotation say about persistence?
- Do I agree with the author's statement about
persistence?
Remember that my thesis is "persistence is good."
Here, I interpret Amiel's quotation to meaning that
persistence is necessary to create things. How, otherwise,
could "everything come from nothing?" Trees
must demonstrate persistence in order to grow from acorns
(an approximation of nothing); companies from demonstrate
persistence in order to grow from "mere" ideas
(nothing, in a physical sense).
Merely interpreting Amiel's quotation in this (or some
other) manner isn't enough, however. Your next goal
is to argue that the quotation author is correct or
incorrect, right or wrong, ethical or unethical. You
choose, but you must take a stand.
You could disagree with the sentiment expressed in
the quotation in the following manner: "Amiel is
trying to convince us that 'persistence helps us grow
anything from nothing.' I disagree. In this speech,
I will argue that one cannot create without a large
amount of raw materials, that merely being persistent
will get you nowhere; almost everything comes from something
else - and frequently those resources must be taken
by force. You and I might not like this claim, but it
is a fact of life..."
 If
you're curious, this claim might be argued to derive
from a loose reading of Machiavelli. In the Prince,
he argued that some leaders fashion governments from
their ideas alone, but that most of them take from existing
forms. While I do not suggest you take on his philosophy
as your own, I do suggest that you examine political
and philosophical texts to explore various value systems
that might inform your arguments.
By now, you might be thinking that this impromptu speaking
is heady stuff. Can't speeches be funny, simple, and
practical? Of course they can, and they should. However,
we should start from a perspective that seeks to uncover
a significant question about the human condition. The
ideas that emerge from the game of threes are designed
to be simple enough, yet rich enough, that you will
be able to develop an effective impromptu speech with
confidence.
In the next handout, we will explore the development
of arguments. Here, your topic matrices become essential.
The goal in impromptu is to support your thesis claim
with two or three arguments that are organized persuasively.
Those arguments will build upon one another to defend
your claim about a particular value (and the quotation
author's stance toward that value). Each argument will
be organized according to the various topics that you've
chosen to develop. For example, you might use examples
from the topic "American League baseball teams"
to support the argument "athletes demonstrate that
you can rise from nowhere to accomplish anything,"
defending the thesis "persistence is good"
that serves as your interpretation of the quotation
"almost everything comes from nothing." It
may sound complicated, so start with what you've learned
already. Develop your topic matrix and start playing
the game of threes.
|
