So because we are shifting units from oral to written knowledge and I have already discussed my civilizations eloquence and philosophy with reference to both a written work and interview, I have decided to discuss a topic on a way I think we all use oral and written knowledge to communicate concepts and doctrine. For this blog I would like to talk a little bit about how we prepare for and present our talks given at sacrament!We have all have received that dreaded phone call at one point or another where you know the bishopric will ask you if you can give a talk the next sunday or in a few weeks. After you unwillingly agree to speak, you usually are assigned a topic or doctrine to touch on, but that is about it. It is up to you to come up with the actual written part yourself and then present that written down speech to the congregation in an engaging oral manner. I'd like to discuss each of these parts and then see how they are connected to one another.
So there are a few ways people choose to prepare for their talk with the written portion of the process. Some write the whole thing down word for word, as the general authorities do during general conference with the assistance of a teleprompter. Other people choose to just right notes and references to main concepts to be discussed rather than writing out the whole thing. But what are the implications of each method? Both methods can have a significant effect on the oral component of giving a talk.
The oral portion of a talk is seemingly the most important. It is the one that everyone sees and hears and therefore is the main way one can use skills to communicate your point eloquently. But the oral component depends a lot on the quality and form of the written component. The first method of writing a talk will provide a pretty stress free talk were you can just read off the script with a few brief eye contacts to the audience. You will have less likelihood of messing up and can plan out jokes, scripture references, and sometimes even, yes, a little planned spontaneity such as emotional moments that are seemingly legitimate and authentic. But the second approach to the written component, I believe, provides for a much better use of oral knowledge to eloquently get across your point in an interesting and engaging fashion. Not being bound to a script allows you to touch on the concepts in a more fluid and personable matter where you are saying in your own words what you think in that moment. You may mess up a few words here and there, but these are small sacrifices for the ability to be much more involved and engaging for the congregation. The minute you begin to speak in your own words and not reading off the written component, the congregation begins to really listen and values what you are saying. And I promise you that when those spiritual or emotional moments come, it will be legitimately spontaneous and authentic and the congregation will appreciate it that much more.
As you can see, the written component of a talk really does have an effect on how you orally present something and how much meaning the oral method will have. As we begin to discuss written knowledge in class, I believe we will see this pattern again, that the way we write affects our orality in positive and negative ways. I hope this has been an interesting segue from oral knowledge to written knowledge!!
The oral communication of a written document does allow for a more personal touch and for more emotion. I have thought about in the Book of Mormon how Nephi says that he his not mighty in writing as he is in speaking. I can't imagine the power he would bring communicating his words in an oral fashion.
ReplyDeleteDr. Burton gave another approach to talk preparation in class today! You write out the entire talk, but then you don't refer to it when you actually speak. I think that seems like a great way to be completely prepared but still maintain that authenticity you wrote about.
ReplyDeleteOoh, speaking in church. I had the worst experience with that this summer and gave about six talks because I was going to the singles group in our ward-not a separate ward-and they apparently didn't communicate very well. But I did learn a lot about giving talks during this time. At first, I did the first method of writing everything down and reading off a script. But, this method actually made me feel really dumb as I was not connecting with the audience and had no idea what they thought of what I was saying. I didn't switch completely out of this process, but, for the last few, I ended up using an outline of what I was going to say and felt like I could connect a lot easier with the audience, even though I messed up a few times.
ReplyDeleteI only joined the church a year and a half ago, but I've been going with my friend since I first read the Book of Mormon in seventh grade. In my family's church, only the pastor speaks on Sunday, so seeing so many different people, including teenagers, speak on a Sunday was something new to me. I thought it was interesting when members bore their testimonies, but at first I always wondered how they could be willing to stand in front of a crowd and speak without preparing anything, like an outline, to read from. Now I know that the Spirit flows so much easier when things aren't written down. In order to make it flow, you just have to be in tune with the Spirit.
ReplyDeleteBy the way Andrew, CONGRATS on posting our 50TH BLOG!!! Milestone, you guys??? :)
ReplyDeleteI do think that it's always important to outline what you're going to say, and that the most efficient way to do that is probably to write it down. My problem giving one talk was, I kept skipping around since I realized later that my points weren't in the best order. So maybe practicing going through it once or twice would help too!
ReplyDelete