Oratory (speech)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In ancient Greece and Rome, oratory was studied as a component of rhetoric (that is, composition and delivery of speeches), and was an important skill in public and private life. Aristotle and Quintilian discussed oratory, and the subject, with definitive rules and models, was emphasised as a part of a "complete education" during the Middle Ages and Renaissance, although this was generally confined to the church.
The development of parliaments in the 18th century saw the rise of great political orators; the ability to wield words effectively became one of the chief tools of politicians, and often made the greatest difference in their positions. By the mid 20th century, oratory became less grandiloquent and more conversational; for instance, the "fireside chats" of President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
The term oratory has generally fallen into disuse and is used mostly as a historical or subject term. See public speaking and orator.
[edit] Development of oration since ancient Greece
The history of oratory can be confused with the one of rhetoric in certain sense. In fact, the art of public speaking was firstly developed by the ancient Greeks and, after the ascension of Rome, copied and modified by the Latins. An example would be Cicero.
In the opinion of Dr. Iran P. Moreira Necho, the "...oratory suffered severely after the Latin power ascension, for the public speech can only be developed in ambients where the debate is allowed. Hence, inside a Roman regime, where the very essence of man was to live as a State appendices (and not debate it), the oratory fastly became a mere compendium on "how to speak fluently" (focus on the beauty of the exposition), even though without any content (preferably without content, since it requires critical thinking)..."[1]
That is why Latin oratory (formalist, with little to no focus on content) ended to find a reception in the world until the beginnings of the 20th century, since the majority of the states in the indicated period was ruled by some kind of monarchy or dictatorship.
In spite of this, with World War II , a historical moment where the democratic ideals began to take body in the world and there began a gradual deprecation of the old Latin style of communication which focused on the formalism.
Nowadays, there is a vigorous tendency to return to the "Greek School of Oratory" (Aristotelian), since the modern world does not accept - as it did in the past - "fluent speeches" without any content. On the other hand, despite the high demand, the creation of new centers of Greek oratory have some counterpoints:
Teachers:
- The Latin Oratory, because it is merely formal, is easy to teach.
- The Greek Oratory, for it demands much more in terms of content, requires (from the masters) an extraordinarily superior formation (philosophy, logic, ethics, stylistics, grammar, etc...), since it is not acceptable that a Master could be defeated by his/her disciples. Therefore, while teachers of Latin Oratory are just any person who delivers speeches with fluency, to train a teacher of Greek oratory could take years of study and deep meditation.
Students:
- Latin Oratory can be taught through relatively fast courses.
- Greek Oratory demands much more time and effort.
[edit] Distinctions between the Latin Oratory School and the Greek Oratory in terms of speech
- Latin: Strong valorization of form. Remarkable use of stylistics. Constant appeal to the listener emotions. Communication is deemed as a way to demonstrate "intellectual superiority" or eloquence.
- Greek: Strong valorization of message content. Utilization of argumentation strategies. Appeal to the common sense. Communication is deemed as skill to persuade and obtain influence.
