ESSAYS AND ORATORY
+66. Essays.+ An essay is a brief dissertation on some special subject.
It aims to present its statements in a clear and interesting manner, and
this careful regard for a finished form brings the essay within the
scope of literature in the strict sense of the word. The essay does not
usually aim at an elaborate discussion of a subject in all its phases,
and it is thus distinguished from the treatise. Its origin dates from
the French author Montaigne in the latter part of the sixteenth century;
but since the vast multiplication of periodicals in recent years, the
essay has become a prominent department of literature. There is scarcely
any subject of human interest that may not be discussed in an essay.
The principal forms of the essay are as follows:
(1) The _tract_, which is usually a brief discussion of some religious
or moral subject.
(2) The _editorial_, which is an editor's discussion of some theme of
public interest.
(3) The _review_ or _critique_, which is a critical examination and
discussion of some literary work.
Two general and well-defined types of essays may be profitably
distinguished. The first may be called the _personal_ essay. It allows
great freedom of treatment, and in large measure reflects the
personality of the author. It has something of the ease and charm of
conversation. The essays of Montaigne, of Addison, and of Lamb are of
this personal type.
The other kind may be designated as the _didactic_ essay. Its aim is the
impartation of knowledge and the formation of public opinion. The
personality of the author is concealed behind his statements and
arguments. He does not write in the first person. In our best writing of
this kind there is a careful treatment of the subject.
The method of the essay is chiefly exposition. It uses narration and
description only in a subordinate way. The essayist usually has some
information to impart, some argument to present, or some conclusion to
be reached. His purpose naturally determines the mode of treatment.
Generally there will be a beginning or introduction, a middle containing
the body of treatment, and a conclusion. Very frequently, however, the
writer plunges at once into his subject without the formality of an
introduction.
In estimating the worth of an essay three things are to be chiefly taken
into account. The first is its form, including diction, sentences,
paragraphs, and arrangement. The various points brought forward should
be in a natural order, and each should have the prominence to which its
relative importance entitles it. There should be movement or progress in
the treatment, and the essay should gain in weight as it advances to the
conclusion.
The second point is the subject-matter of the essay. As the essay is not
intended to be exhaustive, there should be judgment in the selection of
points to be presented. A skillful writer will be recognized as much by
what he leaves in the inkstand as by what he says. In the presentation
of facts there should be a conscientious regard for truth. The author's
originality, force, culture will be reflected in the matter and manner
of his discussion.
Then, last of all, the writer's mood and standpoint should be
considered. Is he serious, satirical, humorous? Is he writing from the
standpoint of party or sect, or is he seeking only to know and present
the truth? Is he thoroughly acquainted with the subject that he
discusses? Only as we answer questions like these can we enter into full
sympathy with an author and form a just and adequate conception of his
work.
+67. Oratory.+ Oratory is that form of discourse that is primarily
intended not to be read but to be spoken. Its object is mingled
instruction and persuasion, and it may be defined as instruction
suffused with feeling. In its lofty and impassioned forms oratory
attains to eloquence,--that quality which profoundly moves the hearts
and wills of the hearers.
But it is well to recognize the source of eloquence, which is to be
distinguished from bombast and fustian. Eloquence is not a trick of
rhetoric; it springs from the moral character of the speaker, from his
gifts and attainments, and from the subject and occasion. "Mere
eloquence," said Webster, "does not consist in speech. It cannot be
brought from far. Labor and learning may toil for it, but they will toil
in vain. Words and phrases may be marshaled in every way, but they
cannot compass it. It must exist in the man, in the subject, and in the
occasion. Affected passion, intense expression, the pomp of declamation,
all may aspire to it; they cannot reach it. It comes, if it come at all,
like the outbreaking of a fountain from the earth, or the bursting of
volcanic fires, with spontaneous, original, native force."
Oratory is variously divided, but perhaps no other division is better
than that of Aristotle. He distinguishes three species of oratory:
(1) Deliberative oratory, which has its place in deliberative bodies. In
Parliament or Congress it is concerned with questions of legal
enactment, finance, or administration; in religious bodies, with
ecclesiastical questions; in scientific bodies, with questions of
science. At the present day a large part of oratory is deliberative in
character.
(2) Judicial or forensic oratory, which is heard before courts of
justice. It is chiefly concerned with human conduct in relation to law,
and its aim is to determine what is legally right and just.
(3) Demonstrative oratory is chiefly occupied with the presentation of
abstract or practical truth. It is heard in lectures, sermons, and other
public addresses. It draws its themes from any department of human
knowledge, and aims at imparting instruction, uplifting character, or
influencing conduct.
A finished oration is a work of art. Ancient rhetoricians distinguished
six parts, which may still be found in some elaborate specimens of
pulpit or forensic eloquence. These six parts were (1) the exordium or
introduction, (2) the division of the subject, (3) the statement of what
is to be established, (4) the argumentation, (5) the appeal to the
feelings, and (6) the peroration or conclusion.
It is evident that this scheme for an oration is, as a rule, much too
artificial and elaborate for use at the present day. Modern intelligence
and modern intensity of life demand greater brevity and directness. An
audience of the present time rarely has patience with a discourse of
more than an hour, and it generally prefers one of half that length. In
a modern discourse we may generally recognize a threefold division:
(1) The introduction, which points out the relation of the subject to
the occasion, or otherwise prepares the audience better to appreciate
the discussion that is to follow. It should be natural, and not so
lengthy as to be out of keeping with the main body of the discourse.
(2) The discussion of the subject in hand. This consists of a statement
of the theme and the various facts, arguments, and illustrations that
are designed to throw light upon it and establish its truth. This is the
main part of the discourse, and great care should be exercised in the
statement of facts and the arrangement of arguments. Personal conviction
should be back of what is said, for without this tone of sincerity the
most brilliant rhetoric and eloquent declamation will be in vain.
(3) The conclusion, in which the results of the discussion are
presented. It should be clear and claim no more than has been fairly
established in the preceding discussion. On the basis of the truth
previously presented it may contain an appeal to the feelings and the
will, urging the course of action that has been shown to be advisable,
wise, or obligatory.
Argumentation may seek to establish the truth of a proposition in four
different ways:
(1) There may be the introduction of testimony. By testimony is meant
the statements of actual observers or witnesses. It rests on experience,
and may be given orally or in writing; hence we have _oral_ and
_written_ testimony.
(2) A proposition may be supported or established by analogy. Reasoning
from analogy is that process by which we infer that when two objects
resemble each other in several known particulars they will also resemble
each other in a certain unknown particular. The planet Mars, for
example, resembles the earth in shape, motion, atmosphere, change of
seasons, and relation to the sun; and from the resemblance in these
known particulars some persons have inferred that, like the earth, it is
also inhabited.
Analogical reasoning has a prominent place in our mental operations.
Analogy lies at the basis of simile, metaphor, and personification,
which are often used in argumentation. We frequently use analogical
processes in the practical affairs of life, inferring, for example, that
there will be rain to-day because the temperature, appearance of the
clouds, and the condition of the atmosphere resemble those of a rainy
day last week.
But it is to be observed that the arguments from analogy give us at the
best only probable truth. The degree of probability depends upon the
nature and number of the resemblances upon which the conclusion is
based. There must be no point of dissimilarity that would disprove the
conclusion inferred.
(3) We may establish a conclusion by an array of facts. This is called
inductive reasoning. We observe, for example, that A, B, C, and all
other men of the past, so far as our knowledge goes, have died; and in
view of these individual cases we draw the comprehensive conclusion that
all men are mortal.
But this mode of reasoning, common and indispensable as it is, needs to
be employed with caution. There is always danger of inferring more than
the facts warrant. When the inference is based on an inadequate
induction of facts, the process is called "jumping at a conclusion,"--a
mistake that is frequently made. Even large inductions are not always
safe. We might conclude, for instance, that, because the bulldog, hound,
mastiff, setter, spaniel, terrier, and other species we have known, are
accustomed to bark, therefore all dogs bark. Yet this apparently
well-founded conclusion is erroneous, for there is a non-barking species
in Greenland.
(4) Again, we may establish a truth by showing that it comes within an
established and recognized principle. This process is known as deductive
reasoning. The principle on which deductive reasoning depends is the
self-evident truth that "whatever is true of the whole is true of the
parts." Starting from the general truth that all men are mortal, we may
conclude that A, B, and C are mortal.
The general truth that supplies the basis of deductive reasoning may be
taken from various sources. Sometimes the truth is self-evident or
intuitive, as the axioms that lie at the basis of mathematical
reasoning. Sometimes they are truths arrived at by inductive processes.
Sometimes they are maxims that have gained the assent of mankind; and
again, they are the statements of an accepted philosophy, creed, code,
or other recognized source of authority.
In deductive reasoning two points need particular attention: (1) the
fundamental principle on which the argument is based should be well
established or recognized as true; and (2) the conclusion should
necessarily follow from the truth assumed in the beginning, and not
embrace more than is duly warranted by it.
The general structure of an oration is determined by its object. There
should be, in large measure, simplicity, unity, and progress. The
language should be within the comprehension of the average hearer; the
sentences, as a rule, should be brief and forcible; and the general
style should be concrete rather than abstract. All parts of the oration
should be bound together by the single truth and purpose at which the
orator aims. The arguments should not be abstruse but clear and
striking. Irrelevant matter of every kind, no matter how brilliant in
itself, should be excluded; and every fact and principle should be
scrupulously correct. Understatement is better than overstatement. The
orator should continually advance toward his conclusion; the auditor
should feel himself borne along not on a circling eddy but on the bosom
of a full, strong current of thought and feeling.
It was Cicero who said that the orator should know everything. However
desirable such attainments might be, they are no longer possible; but
the orator should have a wide range of culture and experience. This is
necessary to give breadth and proportion to his outlook upon the world.
In addition to this general culture he should, as far as possible, be
master of his subject; and to this end he should bestow upon his
discourse careful and even laborious preparation. Without these
requisites the orator is apt to prove uninteresting, inconclusive, and
unsuccessful.
REVIEW QUESTIONS
1. What is an essay? What brings it within the range of art? How is it
distinguished from a treatise? With whom did it originate? What gives it
prominence now? Name its principal forms. What is a tract? an editorial?
a critique or review? Name two types of essay. What is the character of
the _personal_ essay? Give examples. Define the _didactic_ essay. What
is the method of the essay? What parts may usually be distinguished?
What three things are to be considered in estimating the worth of an
essay? How should the successive points be presented? How is a skillful
writer recognized? What is said of the essayist's mood and standpoint?
2. What is oratory? What is its object? What is eloquence? Whence does
it rise? What is the substance of Webster's view? How did Aristotle
divide oratory? What is _deliberative_ oratory? _judicial_ or
_forensic_? _demonstrative_? What parts were anciently distinguished?
What is said of this scheme? What three parts are now generally
recognized? What is the purpose of the introduction? What is said of the
discussion? What is said of the speaker's convictions? What is the
nature of the conclusion? What four methods of proof may be used? What
is meant by testimony? What are the two kinds of testimony? What is
meant by reasoning from analogy? Illustrate. What is said of its use?
What sort of truth is furnished by analogical reasoning? On what does
the degree of its probability depend? What is inductive reasoning?
Illustrate. What is meant by "jumping at a conclusion"? Give a case of
erroneous conclusion. What is deductive reasoning? Illustrate. Whence
may come the general truth lying at the basis of deduction? What two
points must be attended to carefully? What qualities should an oration
have? Why should the diction and sentence structure be simple? What
should give unity to the oration? What is said of irrelevant matter? of
movement or progress? What was Cicero's view of an orator's attainments?
What is the advantage of broad culture? What is said of special
preparation?
NOTE
In place of brief illustrative and practical selections, it is
recommended that the student be referred to complete essays and
orations. In addition to current literature, in which will be found
essays of various kinds, Bacon's "Essays," the papers of the
_Spectator_, Lamb's "Essays of Elia," and the essays of Macaulay, De
Quincey, Carlyle, and Emerson may be used. Under the head of oratory,
apart from contemporary speeches and sermons, the student might be
referred to Burke's "Speech on American Taxation," Webster's "Bunker
Hill Orations," Patrick Henry's "Speech before the Virginia Convention,"
Emerson's "Representative Men," and Carlyle's "Heroes and Hero Worship."
The essays assigned should be investigated as to form, matter, and mood
or purpose. Such questions as the following may be answered: What kind
of essay is it? Is it personal or didactic? What is the theme? What is
the writer's aim? What is his mood? What constitutes the introduction?
the body of the essay? the conclusion? What may be said of the diction,
sentences, and style? What is the order of thought as determined by
analysis? Is there symmetry? Is there movement? Is irrelevant matter
excluded? Is the treatment lit up by humor? Is there breadth of view?
What is the writer's standpoint? Is there care and self-restraint of
statement?
In the case of a speech the same questions may be asked in reference to
form, content, mood, or purpose. In addition the student may determine
the class of oratory to which the speech belongs. He may ask such
questions as the following: Is it eloquent in any part? What is the mode
of argumentation? What is the form of proof? Is the argument sound and
convincing? The student should analyze the speech, in whole or in part,
and make a synopsis of its principal propositions and proofs. The result
may be presented in a written or oral critique.