V. A. Vasilchenko. Ancient skepticism and modern philosophy

TOPIC 4 Culture and social ideal I would like to remind you that we are developing a philosophical understanding of culture. Any activity that resists the elements is cultural. After all, even culture can be destroyed in a cunning manner, but it can also be destroyed culturally? systematically, organized, prudently.

The ancient Greek oral tradition and heroic epic already laid the foundation for a maturing rhetorical ideal. For example, in Homer’s poems the speakers are presented - Menelaus, Odysseus, the texts of their speeches are given, the power of influence on people in moments of struggle, the choice of tragic and heroic moments in the lives of heroes, the vividness of the description of events are shown.

This rhetorical direction is called ancient, it is associated with the name of Homer.

In the IV-III centuries. BC e. The theoretical positions of this direction, the rhetorical ideal, were formed, they had and are having a strong influence on ethics, literature, and culture. These positions were supported by Rome, the Middle Ages, and the Renaissance.

Let's look at these positions.

1. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle saw the goals of rhetoric and oratory in serving the good and happiness of people. The power of persuasion, as the main advantage of eloquence, is to understand what people’s happiness is and how to achieve it.

2. Rhetoric is not only the practice of communication and eloquence, this science has its own subject - speech, it is closely related to philosophy, language, logic, ethics, and literary criticism. Rhetoric has its own goals, patterns, structure. Within the framework of this rhetorical direction, the doctrine of canons was formed - invention, disposition, elocution, etc., connections with poetics (tropes, figures), stylistics, logic, and the theory of upbringing and education were developed.

3. In the same system, an ideal model of the speaker was developed as a highly educated, highly moral, active, quick-reacting, and sociable person.

4. The ethics of the ancient ideal required addressing the listener with respect. Speech is a two-way process, the result depends on both sides.

5. The next feature of the ancient ideal is its attitude to truth. The largest speakers who belonged to this type of ethical position confirmed in practice the firmness of their convictions and their position - not to deviate from their understanding of the truth.

The presented characteristics belong to the categories of ethos and pathos.

In the field of logos, the tradition did not oppose sophistic norms - neither in the recognition and use of logical laws and rules, nor in attention to dialogue, nor in the skill of choosing various means of language.

With great attention to the logic of the text, preference was still given to the structure of linguistic forms, the contiguity of the choice of words, the use of expressive means of language, and the culture of speech.

Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 43 BC) The pinnacle of the development of the oratory art of Ancient Rome is the activity of Cicero, one of the most outstanding orators in the world. His name has become a household name.

Cicero was born near Rome into a family belonging to an ancient family. It is believed that one of his ancestors was a simple peasant who was engaged in gardening: cicero is a variety of peas, hence this provincial nickname.

From childhood, Cicero was distinguished by an extraordinary love of science, was fluent in Greek, and as a student became famous for the extraordinary understanding and speed with which he mastered the sciences.

In Rome, Cicero studied philosophy, law, rhetoric, and poetry. Cicero firmly decided to devote himself in the future to politics and the legal profession.

Cicero was 25 years old when he made his first defense speech in the courtroom. In it, he condemned robbery, impudence and insolent people, and expressed faith in goodness and justice.

Cicero thought a lot about Rome, the people, the history and destinies of the republic. These thoughts were reflected in numerous speeches. He invariably won the cases he took on. His popularity grew; he became a senator and then a consul - in ancient Rome during the era of the republic - one of the two highest officials.

Cicero outlined the essence of his rhetorical system in three treatises: “On the Orator”, “Brutus”, “Orator”.

All these works are united by the general idea of ​​the need and expediency of general knowledge and broad culture for the speaker.

The treatise “On the Orator” consists of three books and is written in the form of a dialogue. Cicero's interlocutors were well-known orators in their time. Contents: Cicero’s answer to one of them’s doubts about the need for general knowledge for an orator. The author temperamentally shows what literature, history, law, philosophy gives to the speaker. Of the three branches of philosophy (the doctrine of nature, ethics, logic), Cicero considered ethics and logic the most useful for an orator.

In this work, Cicero identified specific tasks for teaching eloquence. Based on the experience of his predecessors, he briefly and, as always, talentedly formulated the canons (Canon (Greek) - usually the position of a certain direction, teaching.) of classical rhetoric, which in subsequent eras were adopted by many authors of works on eloquence.

So, the speaker, according to Cicero, must: invent, arrange, decorate (express, set out in a well-known syllable), pronounce. Hence the division of classical rhetoric into five parts:

a) invention - in Russian translation “invention of thoughts”, or preparation of the content of speech;

b) disposition, in Russian rhetoric - location (usually associated with the speech genre);

c) elocution and ornamentation - expression and decoration; the last - the most voluminous part - subsequently acquired a leading role (choice of language means, styles, speech culture, poetics);

d) memoria - memorization of a prepared text, memory training, its high readiness;

e) action, or performance - impeccable command of speech, mastery of oral expression, ability to behave, gestures, etc.

In the dialogue “About the Speaker”, much attention is paid to the problem of influencing the listener’s feelings in public speaking. Cicero proceeds from the fact that people in their actions are more often guided by feelings than by rules and laws. Therefore, the speaker’s ability to influence the feelings of the audience is of great importance in rhetoric.

Brutus sets out the history of Roman eloquence in chronological order and is invaluable as a source of information about early Roman orators. It is built in the form of a dialogue with friends Brutus and Atticus.

The treatise “The Orator” answers the question: What is the ideal of eloquence? In search of an ideal, Cicero proceeds from the three main purposes of oratory: to teach, to please, to motivate.

The ideal speaker is the one who in his speeches instructs his listeners, gives them pleasure, and subjugates their will. The first is the duty of a speaker, the second is the guarantee of popularity, the third is a necessary condition for success.

Cicero formulated the characteristics of different types of eloquence, arguing that a real orator is one who knows how to speak about the low simply, about the high important and about the average moderately.

2. Marcus Fabius Quintilian (c. 36 c. 100 AD) In ​​the second half of the 1st century. AD Quintilian becomes a theorist of classical eloquence: lawyer, teacher, head of the first state school of rhetoric.

Quintilian's knowledge of rhetoric was so extensive that friends and students insisted that he write about the rules of eloquence. The famous rhetorician disagreed for a long time, citing works already written on rhetoric in Greek and Roman literature. But subsequently he nevertheless wrote a treatise known as The Education of an Orator (translated into Russian in 1834 by A.S. Nikolsky). The treatise is a summary of the theoretical works of his predecessors and his own twenty years of experience as a teacher of rhetoric and trial lawyer.

Quintilian's work consists of 12 books: “On the Education of the Future Orator”; “When to give a youth to a rhetorician”; “History of rhetoric and its components”; “Attack, narration...”; "Evidence, refutation"; “On the arousal of passions: laughter, compassion, reflection”; "Location"; "Verbal expression"; "Shapes"; “About the abundance of words”; “On decency in speech”; “The speaker is like a person; moral character."

Quintilian's work is not only comprehensive, but also surprisingly rich in details: he gave the most complete list of tropes with their characteristics, revealed the connections between rhetoric and literature, logic, and increased attention to memory and types of text construction. The author developed training programs, methods of training students, and gave lists of life situations that encourage a person to speak and make statements. He gave recommendations for constructing phrases, dialogues of various types, argumentation, and giving examples. The problems of education - physical, moral, general cultural, harmonious - are not ignored. Much attention is paid to language learning and language exercises. The essence of rhetoric, according to Quintilian's definition, is the union of thought and word. The goals of upbringing and education are also defined - this is preparation for social activities: in public service, in culture, in court, in teaching. Quintilian created a model of the highest level of education for a young man.

In his treatise, Quintilian outlined advice based mainly on Cicero's system, because he considered the art of eloquence of the great republican a model for any orator.

The main provisions of Quintilian's work are close to the ideas of Cicero, but there are also significant differences in them.

Let us compare, for example, the statements of Cicero and Quintilian on rhetoric.

Cicero (following Aristotle): Rhetoric is the art of persuasion.

KVINTILIAN: Rhetoric is the science of speaking well. Because art does not depend on the outcome of the matter, it lies in the action, not the consequences.

Many differences in the views of Cicero and Quintilian were rooted in the fact that they lived in different eras of the existence of the Roman state: Cicero in the era of the republic, Quintilian in the era of the empire. During the period of the Republic, training in rhetorical schools prepared the Roman for broad practical activity. However, in the later period, the period of empires, the art of speech was cultivated, thanks to which speech was supposed to provide aesthetic pleasure with verbal structure and masterful pronunciation. But at the same time, speech betrayed its original purpose to express thoughts and feelings.

The trend in oratory, led by Quintilian, was a kind of last stage in the development of Roman eloquence. With the death of the republic, Roman classical eloquence also died. Ceremonial (epideictic) eloquence with its pomp and exaggerated attention to form came to the fore.

To summarize, we note that throughout the entire period of ancient culture, rhetoric determined not only the style of speech, but to a certain extent also the way of thinking and behavior, i.e. philosophy of life.

It is this version of rhetorical positions that has received the widest distribution at different historical stages and the deepest theoretical justification. With slight differences in the views of individual authors, this direction unites the largest theorists and speakers, thinkers of the 4th-1st centuries. BC e. - Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Cicero. This theoretical direction also absorbed the traditions of Homeric Greece.

In essence, the ancient Greek oral tradition and the heroic epic already laid the foundation for a maturing rhetorical ideal: in Homer’s poems the orators Menelaus and Odysseus are presented, the texts of their speeches are given, the power of their influence on people at decisive moments of the struggle is shown, as well as the most important thing - the choice of tragic and heroic moments in the lives of the heroes, the vividness of the description of events, the most complex construction of plots and the choice of linguistic means. Let us remind the reader that the Iliad and the Odyssey lived in people's memory for a long time and were transmitted orally.

The origins of this rhetorical movement, called ancient, are associated with the name of Homer (VI century BC), who was blind, but saw the distance of times better than the sighted.

VIV-III centuries. BC e. The theoretical positions of this Board, the rhetorical ideal, were formed, they had and still have a strong influence on the fate of ethics, literature, culture as a whole. These positions were supported by both pragmatic Rome and the middle-class

centuries, and the Renaissance, and even our contradictory tragic era.

Let's look at these positions.

1. Goals of rhetoric and oratory Socrates, Plato
Aristotle was seen as serving the good and happiness of people. The power of refuge
Denia as the main advantage of eloquence, skill as an orator
is not about achieving your own goals, subjugating people
yourself (at any cost), but to understand what makes people happy
how to achieve it. Thus, in Aristotle’s Rhetoric there are philosophies
Sophistic calculations of the author about the essence of happiness. He comes to a conclusion
I believe that happiness is multifaceted, it is in well-being, inspired
virtue, happiness is the respect of people, prosperity in the house
a big friendly family, and most importantly, “to have a good friend.”

2. Rhetoric is not only the practice of communication and eloquence
this science has its own subject - speech, it is closely related to philology
sophia, language, logic, ethics, literary criticism. Rhetoric
ka has its own goals, patterns, structure. As part of this
rhetorical direction, the doctrine of canons was formed -
inventions, dispositions, elocutions, etc., connections have been developed with
ethics (tropes, figures), stylistics, prosody, logic, those
oria of upbringing and education.

3. In the same system, it was developed with special care
the ideal model of a speaker as a highly educated individual, you
moral, active, with quick reactions,
sociable.

4. If in a sophistic system the attitude towards the listener is not
was respectful (it’s a pleasure to wrap him around your finger
tion), then the ethics of the ancient ideal required an appeal to listening
respectfully. Speech is a two-way process, the result depends
sieve from both sides.

In classical rhetoric, Aristotle developed a strict theory of speech mentality, speech ethics of an entire people, large social groups and the value orientations operating in them. The speaker focuses on a strong personality. These communication norms guide not only the speaker, but also both sides of linguistic contact, creating an atmosphere of mutual respect. Both parties are interested in a fruitful contact; the listener develops a certain expectation, anticipation, as well as a fear of misunderstanding, disagreement, and disharmony of communication.

These nuances are very subtle, sometimes difficult to detect, but they are the most valuable in communication. It should be noted here that at this level of communication the role of the subtlest shades of choice of words and turns of speech, intonation, and timbre of voice is very high. This is the highest spiritual level of communication in any situation - from oratory to intimate communication with loved ones.

High interest in this dominant contact, the establishment of an invisible connection, the birth of the first threads of mutual understanding would be noticeable in different eras, reflected in literature and the performances of brilliant actors.

The first feature of the ancient ideal is the attitude towards truth,
speakers who belonged to this type of ethical
practice confirmed the firmness of their convictions, their
by __ not 0TST fall from one’s own hard-won understanding

It is known that the great Socrates could save his life, And he preferred death to flight by drinking a cup of hemlock. Demosthenes, known for his philippics, made a similar speech against the Macedonian king Philip II, when he still gained power over Athens. The search for truth and loyalty to it is a

to the spiritual strength of a person, his moral fortitude. In Russian rhetoric, M.V. Lomonosov placed the defense of scientific truth above all else.

But even in classical rhetoric the need for flexible solutions to the “truth-lie” dilemma was recognized, for example: maintaining a military secret, hiding some terrible secret out of compassion, “white lies.”

The sad experience of history indicates that for entire nations there is a voluntary or forced need for lies, officially presented as the truth (totalitarian regimes).

The psychological nature of such a universal, mass lie has not yet received a strict scientific assessment, and its moral assessment is sharply negative. But it can definitely be said that this phenomenon, so frequent in the history of power, has nothing to do with rhetoric in general, much less with the ancient rhetorical ideal. Classical rhetoric, represented by its creators and ideologists, has always opposed lies.

The characteristics discussed above can be classified into the categories of ethos and pathos. Now let us turn to the understanding of logos.

In this area, the tradition did not oppose sophistic norms - neither in the recognition and use of logical laws and rules, nor in the enormous attention to dialogue, to discursive Speech, nor in the skill of choosing various means of language. Nevertheless, we note the most important.

With great attention to the logic of the text, advantage was still given to the structure of linguistic forms, the accuracy of the choice of words, the use of expressive means of language, and the culture of speech.

Culture of dialogue, mastery of argument (without any tricks)

p at ^ ^ axis with literature as an art, with poetry as a literary discipline; The best example of this is Cicero.

l

Linguistic disciplines were widely involved, already p 0
received in the 4th-3rd centuries. BC e. significant development: styles*
grammar, prosody, rudiments of speech theory. A "

The culture of speech and expression of thought were brought to the highest perfection. European connoisseurs of linguistic mastery (Boileau, Schiller, Pushkin and many others) were delighted with the sound of ancient Greek and Latin. Until now, the Latin of the times of Cicero and Seneca (Lucius Annaeus Seneca, 4 BC - 65 AD, author of “Moral Letters to Lucilius”) is considered a model of linguistic culture. There are known estimates in which

It was impossible to further improve Latin after the 1st century.

10. Old Russian traditions

Modern science has a small but sufficient number of sources for the study of the ancient Russian rhetorical ideal, mainly monuments of the 11th-12th centuries. and the beginning of the 13th century. In understanding its originality, researchers rely on both folklore materials and works of fiction, first of all, on “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”, and finally, on the chronicle.

These examples allow us to speak about the sustainability of traditions, reflections of which are still felt today, despite the three-century loss of independence of Rus' and the irreparable delay in cultural development.

Rus' X-XII centuries. had direct ties with Byzantium - the heir of Greek ancient culture - until its conquest by the Ottoman Empire in the middle of the 15th century. She maintained strong ties with European countries that adopted the culture of the Roman Empire. Connections were strengthened by family unions: for example, one of the daughters of Yaroslav the Wise (he knew eight languages, was nicknamed Os- momyslom, which means “eight thoughts”) was married to the king of Norway, the other, Anna, was the queen of France (turned out to be the first educated queen).

The study of ancient Russian eloquence and its traditions in the 19th century was carried out by A.S. Shishkov, A.V. Meshchersky, S.N. Glinka. N. F. Koshansky, K. P. Zelenetsky, F. I. Buslaev and others. In the 20th century. " mainly L.K. Graudina, G.L. Miskevich, V.I. Annu* 11 "kin, A.K. Mikhalskaya.

It should be admitted, however, that the history of rhetoric has been studied little,” this was noted by the largest thinker in Russia of the 20th century, an expert on rhetoric, Alexei Fedorovich Losev.

Specific works of ancient Russian eloquence are discussed in Chapter 4 - “Rhetoric in Russia.” Let us now characterize its features.

The speaker, as a rule, is a well-known person, invested with trust - a church leader, a prince, a governor. Often he is like a shadow, remains nameless. The speaker's emotions control his convictions. Competence and knowledge are valued above all, as is language - bright, flowery, “decorated”, without any originality.

2 The speaker always expresses a strong position - this is an advantage
but state interests, concern for the church and people. In speeches

STB always contains a teaching or a call, moral statements, a positive example predominates; criticism is introduced in the form of regret or even crying.

3 The speaker defends the truth, his understanding of justice;
Disputes and polemics are rare.

4. Great attention is paid to communication ethics: tracing
There is high respect for the person giving the speech. By
opinion of the people, the speaker should carry his word high, not about
give a speech to anyone, but only to an authoritative audience.
The very handling of speech expresses the speaker’s respect for the service.
Chatels. Judging by the texts that have reached us, the speaker respects me
information about the addressee. In turn, the people express respect not only
to the personality of the speaker, but also to the word itself, wise and beautiful.

The speaker strives for mutual understanding, thinks in the spirit of conciliarity as the complete unity of all listeners and the people as a whole.

5. The speaker carefully prepares for the speech: the fact itself is preserved
misunderstanding of speeches, their repeated copying indicates their
values. One can, of course, assume that the performances
some crops that are not of high quality are not available to us
we've arrived. But if so, then we can assume that in the environment the image
bathroom people - custodians of manuscripts - the level of requirements was
high

6. The composition of speeches, messages, teachings differs clearly -
clarity, clarity. Here is Metropolitan Hilarion giving a speech at
GOORE of Yaroslav the Wise (“The Word of Law and Grace”), he is about
reveals Grand Duke Vladimir and the Russian land, about which
known and heard in all corners of the earth. “Rise up, oh honorable head,
^from his grave!<...>Look at your grandchildren and great-grandchildren!

Look at the city, consecrated with icons of saints!<...>

3 Rejoice and be glad and praise God!” The pathos of the Metropolitan's speech

that - in a call for the unity of Rus', the strengthening of princely power

> Establishing the independence of both the state and the Church.

For eche is generously decorated with appeals, exclamations, anti-

sch"Pa R allelisms and other figures. It is rich in allegorical

with TV Mi > allegorical. The thought is clear, nothing superfluous, highly sensitive

h e Measures. According to the speaker, unity will happen not only

p Ovo 3 STRONG The state, but also through language, through the Christian mi-

3 Rhene. This is how the beautiful Russian land was glorified.

7. In the speeches of ancient orators, one is captivated by kindness, meekness and zeal, gratitude, admiration for the beauty of the world, the faith in the nature of a wise and beautiful word, the power and beauty of eloquence, and a high respect for ancient wisdom, teaching, and education.

The genre diversity of these speeches by Leniy is also highly appreciated: oratorical speeches, addresses of the prince to the soldiers, lives of saints, teachings, letters, historical narratives.

The oratory works of Ancient Rus' are very closely connected with folklore and literature. They seem to grow from one source. “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” was created for oral use. fullness. Like other works of the heroic epic, it is replete with appeals, as if a conversation with the listeners. Many other works are the same - the spiritual verse “Bo. rice and Gleb", "The Tale of Evpatiy Kolovrat", "Zadonshchina". Even in the XIII-XV centuries. literary works still preserved the oral tradition: “The Tale of the Destruction of the Russian Land”, “The Life of Sergius of Radonezh”.

2. Rhetorical ideal. Features of the ancient Greek and Roman rhetorical ideal. Cicero's treatise "On the Orator"

Each culture develops special and well-defined ideas about how verbal communication should occur. By introducing the general rules of speech behavior and speech work, rhetoric also gives general ideas about the beautiful - the general aesthetic and ethical ideals that have developed historically in a given culture. The rhetorical ideal is a system of the most general requirements for speech and speech behavior, historically developed in a particular culture at a certain time and reflecting the system of its aesthetic and ethical values. This system is natural and historically conditioned. Therefore, the history of rhetoric is considered precisely as the history of emerging, developing and replacing rhetorical ideals.

Rhetoric is one of the most ancient sciences. At various times it occupied a greater or lesser place in the development of society, was valued higher or lower, but never disappeared. In the development of rhetoric, the continuity of traditions, mutual influence of cultures, consideration of national characteristics, and at the same time, a clearly expressed general humanistic character are clearly visible.

The objective basis for the emergence of oratory as a social phenomenon was the urgent need for public discussion and resolution of issues of public importance. History shows that the most important condition for the manifestation and development of oratory, the free exchange of opinions on vital issues, the driving force of critical thought are democratic forms of government, the active participation of free citizens in the political life of the country. It is no coincidence that they say that “rhetoric is the child and condition of democracy.” Freedom of speech, equality of free citizens required them to have good command of speech in order to substantiate their point of view, convince others of its correctness, and defend it, refuting the opinion of an opponent or opponents. The art of oratory develops most actively during critical periods in the life of society, helping to unite people around a common cause, inspiring and guiding them.

So, eloquence became an art under the conditions of the slave-owning system, which created certain opportunities for direct influence on the mind and will of fellow citizens with the help of the living word of the speaker. The flourishing of rhetoric coincided with the flourishing of democracy, when three institutions began to play a leading role in the state: the people's assembly, the people's court, and the Council of Five Hundred. Political issues were decided publicly and trials were carried out. To win over the people (demos), it was necessary to present your ideas in the most attractive way. Under these conditions, eloquence becomes necessary for every person.

The first mentions of orators date back to the times of Homeric Greece. Homer is the first teacher of eloquence for the ancient Greeks. In the Iliad we find descriptions of different types of speakers. The founders of rhetoric were the classical sophists of the 5th century. BC. who highly valued the word and the power of its persuasion. It should be noted that the attitude towards sophistry and sophists was ambivalent and contradictory, which was reflected even in the understanding of the word “sophist”: at first it meant a sage, a talented, capable, experienced person in any art; then, gradually, the unscrupulousness of the sophists, their virtuosity in defending directly opposite points of view led to the fact that the word “sophist” acquired a negative character. Coloring and began to be understood as a false sage, a charlatan, a cunning person.

The theory of rhetoric was actively developed by the sophist philosopher Protagoras from Abdera in Thrace. He was one of the first to use a dialogical form of presentation, in which two interlocutors express opposing views. Paid teachers appeared - sophists, who not only taught practical eloquence, but also composed speeches for the needs of citizens. The sophists constantly emphasized the power of the word, held verbal battles between exponents of different views, and competed in virtuosity in the use of the living word. Gorgias (485-380 BC) from Leontius in Sicily is considered the founder of sophistic rhetoric. Here is how the famous philosopher A.F. Losev writes about his rhetorical activity, relying on ancient sources: “He was the first to introduce the type of education that prepares speakers, special training in the ability and art of speaking, and he was the first to use tropes, metaphors, allegories, inversions, repetitions, apostrophes... Undertaking to teach everyone to speak beautifully and being, by the way, a virtuoso of brevity, Gorgias taught rhetoric to everyone so that they would be able to conquer people, “to make them their slaves of their own free will, and not by force.” By the power of his conviction, he forced the patients to drink such bitter medicines and undergo such operations that even doctors could not force them to do.” Gorgias defined rhetoric as the art of speaking.

The rhetorical ideal of the Sophists had the following features:

1. The rhetoric of the sophists was “manipulating”, monological. The main thing was the ability to manipulate the audience, to amaze listeners with oratorical techniques; 2. The rhetoric of the Sophists was the rhetoric of verbal competition, struggle. A dispute necessarily aimed at the victory of one and the defeat of the other is the element of the sophist; 3. The goal of the sophists’ dispute was not truth, but victory at any cost, therefore it is not the content in the speech that dominates, but the “external form.”

Lisiy, a representative of judicial eloquence, was fluent in the art of storytelling, had a bright, but at the same time simple language, and took into account the peculiarities of oral speech: richness of intonation, precise address, etc. Isocrates is a representative of solemn, magnificent eloquence; wrote speeches, taught oratory to young people. Classical Greek rhetoric was crowned by the truly tragic figure of the political and judicial orator Demosthenes (384-322 BC). Nature did not endow him with any of the qualities necessary for an orator. A sick child, cared for by a widowed mother, he received a poor education. Demosthenes had an unclear, lisping accent, rapid breathing, a nervous tic, i.e. a lot of shortcomings that prevent him from becoming a speaker. At the cost of enormous efforts, constant and hard work, he achieved the recognition of his contemporaries. Circumstances forced him to become a speaker: he was ruined by unscrupulous guardians. Having actively taken up the challenge of defending his own rights through the courts, he began taking lessons from the famous specialist Isey, working to get rid of his shortcomings and eventually won the case. But when he first appeared in public, he was ridiculed and booed. From this moment, overcoming begins - the most characteristic feature in the fate and personality of Demosthenes.

To make his diction clear, he put pebbles in his mouth and so recited passages from the works of poets from memory; He also practiced pronouncing phrases while running or climbing a steep mountain; I tried to learn how to speak several poems in a row or some long phrase without taking a breath. He studied acting, which gives harmony and beauty to speech; to get rid of twitching his shoulder during speech, he hung a sharp sword in such a way that it pricked his shoulder and thus got rid of this habit. He turned any meeting or conversation into a pretext and subject for hard work: left alone, he outlined all the circumstances of the case along with the arguments relating to each of them; memorizing speeches, then reconstructing the course of reasoning, repeating words spoken by others, coming up with all sorts of amendments and ways to express the same thought differently. He sculpted himself, bringing to perfection what nature had so carelessly executed.

The main means of Demosthenes as an orator is his ability to captivate his listeners with the emotional excitement that he himself experienced when speaking about the position of his native city in the Hellenic world. Using the question-and-answer technique, he skillfully dramatized his speech. Demosthenes sometimes supplemented the dialogical form of his speeches with stories; in the pathetic parts of his speeches, he recited poems by Sophocles, Euripides and other famous poets of the ancient world. In general, Demosthenes’ thinking is characterized by irony, sparkling and interrupted at the most pathetic moments of his speeches; actively used antithesis (contrast), rhetorical questions; Its syllable is characterized by euphony, a predominance of long syllables, which evoked a feeling of smoothness. Demosthenes preferred logical stress to all methods of highlighting meaning, so he put the key word in first or last place in the period; a means of highlighting meaning is also the use of several, most often a pair, synonyms denoting an action: let him speak and advise; rejoice and have fun; cry and shed tears. He often used hyperbole, metaphors, mythological images and historical parallels. The speeches are well-reasoned and clear in presentation. The main opponent of Demosthenes was the Macedonian king Philip - Demosthenes wrote eight “philippics” in which he explained to the Athenians the meaning of the Macedonian’s aggressive policy. When Philip received one of the texts of Demosthenes' speech, he said that if he had heard this speech, he would have voted for war against himself. The result of Demosthenes' convincing speeches was the creation of an anti-Macedonian coalition of Greek city-states. Having lost the war with the heirs of Alexander the Great, the Athenians were forced to sign very difficult peace terms and imposed death sentences on speakers who encouraged them to war against Macedonia. Demosthenes took refuge in the temple of Poseidon, but he was overtaken there too. Then he asked to be given a little time to leave a written order to his family and drank poison from a reed stick that the ancient Greeks used to write. Thus ended the days of the greatest master of ancient Greek eloquence, whom the Greeks called simply “orator,” just as Homer was called simply “poet.” However, Demosthenes' fame did not die with him. The ancients carefully preserved more than 60 of his speeches; Plutarch compiled an extensive biography of him, comparing his biography with the life of the outstanding orator of Rome, Marcus Tullius Cicero. The best epitaph for Demosthenes could be his own words: “It is not the word and the sound of the voice that are valuable in an orator, but that he strives for the same thing that the people strive for and that he hates or loves those whom his homeland hates or loves.”

On the basis of the developing art of oratory, attempts were made to theoretically comprehend the principles and methods of oratory. This is how the theory of eloquence—rhetoric—was born. The greatest contributions to the theory of eloquence were made by Socrates (470-399 BC), Plato (428-348 BC) and Aristotle (384-322 BC).

Socrates, an outstanding master of conversations and dialogues, invented dialectics as the art of reasoning, arguing, and conversation. The main levers of Socratic dialectics were irony - a method of critical attitude towards dogmatics, the technique of Socrates, who pretended to be ignorant in order to catch and convict his interlocutor of ignorance, and maieutics (midwifery, obstetrics). The irony lay in the philosopher’s ability to drive his opponent into a logical dead end with a witty system of questions and answers. His irony is good-natured and delicate: “It’s not that I, confusing others, understand everything myself - no, I myself get confused and confuse others. So it is now - I know nothing about what virtue is, and you, perhaps, knew before before meeting me, but now you have become very much like an ignoramus in this matter. And yet, I want to reflect with you and look for what virtue is.” Next, maieutics was connected and, using the question-and-answer method, with the help of logic and dialectics, contributed to the birth of truth. Most often, the questions asked by Socrates were formulated in such a way that they could only receive an unambiguous and predictable answer. For all its apparent simplicity, Socrates' speech was not only in essence, but also in form, quite sophisticated. Socrates did not write down his speeches, but from the dialogues of his student Plato we have an idea of ​​the nature and content of these speeches, of their influence on the listeners.

Plato perfected the art of dialogue. Plato's dialogues were witty, logically constructed, and mysterious in appearance, arousing interest in the subject of the dispute or conversation. Plato enriched living public speech with techniques and forms of polemics, and with the help of allegories and metaphors made its language bright and expressive. In the dialogue "Theaetetus" various considerations are expressed about oratory in connection with questions about wisdom and comprehension of truth. The philosopher condemned the “idle talk” of those who, with their speech, curry favor with the people, without striving for the truth. According to Plato, rhetoric is a skill, a skill, a dexterity that can be learned and developed in oneself. And such skill can be applied for various purposes - good and evil. The ethical orientation of Plato's dialogues is obvious: eloquence should be honest and highly moral, businesslike, and not empty words, it should convince listeners, introducing them to knowledge. Plato believed that the speaker is the bearer of enlightenment. Summarizing the experience of rhetoric, he comes to the conclusion that there are two types of abilities necessary for a speaker. The first is the ability to take everything in with a general view, to reduce everything that is scattered everywhere to one idea. This gives the speaker the opportunity to make the subject of teaching clear. The second is the ability to subdivide everything into types, component parts. The need for unity of analysis and synthesis in oratory is emphasized. Any speech, Plato notes, must be composed like a living being: it must have a body with a head and legs, and the torso and limbs must correspond to each other and to the whole. Plato was one of the first to talk about the psychology of listeners: “Since the power of speech lies in its influence on the soul, someone who is going to become an orator needs to know how many types the soul has...” In the dialogues “Gorgias” and “Phaedrus”, he consolidates the understanding of rhetoric as the science of persuasion . He passed on many of his ideas to his student Aristotle.

The rhetorical ideal of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle can be defined as:

1) dialogical: not manipulating people, but inducing their thoughts - this is the goal of verbal communication and the speaker’s activity;

2) harmonizing: the main goal of the conversation is not victory at any cost, but the unification of the forces of the participants in communication to achieve agreement;

3) semantic: the purpose of a conversation between people, as well as the purpose of speech, is the search and discovery of truth.

The main “tools” for finding truth are Socrates’ irony and maieutics, the ability to build a dialogue in such a way that leading questions lead, as a result of the conversation, to the birth of truth.

The time of Aristotle in the history of Greek culture ends the period of classics, and a new Hellenistic era begins.

The fall of the polis system and the loss of independence by Greece leads to a decrease in the role of oratory. Hellenism is characterized not only by the spread of culture to the East, but also by the influence of Eastern cultures on ancient times. On this basis, in literature and oratory, the so-called Asian style, which gives preference to sound effects, chopped phrases, unusual order of sentence parts for the sake of rhythm, and mannered play on words. The power of speech was seen in floweriness and pomposity. However, among the writers and speakers there were many so-called Atticists, who were guided by classical authors, primarily Demosthenes. The art of words from the socio-political sphere migrates to school and turns into school recitations.

Eloquence in Ancient Rome developed under the influence of the Greek heritage and reached a special peak during the power of the Roman Republic. Republican Rome decided its state affairs through debates in the popular assembly, in the Senate and in court, where almost every free citizen could speak. The most famous orator in Rome was Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC). Any graduate of a Russian pre-revolutionary gymnasium could recite Latin by heart and comment on Cicero’s first speech against Catiline: “How long, O Catiline, will you exhaust our patience...” containing the famous catchphrase “O times! Oh morals! (O tempora! O mores!). It is Cicero who is the main object of admiration and imitation for European rhetoric. During the Renaissance, a real cult of Cicero arose.

He outlined the essence of his rhetorical system in three books, “On the Orator,” “Brutus, or On Famous Orators,” and “The Orator.” Noting the enormous potential of eloquence for influencing and controlling the masses of people, Cicero considered it one of the main weapons of the state. Therefore, he was convinced that any statesman and public figure must master the art of public speech.

Cicero's theory of eloquence occupies a middle position between Asianism and moderate classical Atticism. In the treatise “On the Orator,” he chooses a free form of philosophical dialogue, which allowed him to present the material in a problematic, debatable way, citing and weighing all the arguments for and against. In his opinion, there are few truly good speakers, because eloquence is born from many knowledge and skills. The basis of oratory, according to Cicero, is deep knowledge of the subject; If behind the speech there is no deep content, assimilated and known by the speaker, then verbal expression is empty and childish chatter. Eloquence is an art, but the most difficult of the arts. For a speaker, the most important conditions are: firstly, natural talent, alertness of mind and feelings, good memory; secondly, the study of oratorical theory; thirdly, exercise. Neither education nor natural ability will help the speaker if he does not develop them through constant exercise. He tries to create his own ideal speaker - an educated person who would be both a philosopher and a historian, and would know the law; such a speaker rises above ordinary consciousness and is able to lead people behind him.

The task of the speaker is to win over the audience, present the essence of the matter, establish the controversial issue, support his position, refute the enemy’s opinion, in conclusion, add shine to his positions and finally overthrow the enemy’s positions.

The first requirement for speech is purity and clarity of language, associated with correct, normative pronunciation: the speaker needs to correctly control the organs of speech, breathing and the sounds of speech themselves. “It’s not good when sounds are pronounced too emphatically; it is also not good when they are obscured by excessive negligence; it is not good when a word is pronounced in a weak, dying voice; it’s also not good when they are pronounced while puffing, as if out of breath...” The power of oratory, according to Cicero, is necessarily combined with honesty and high wisdom. Another important point in oratory science is the speaker’s ability to influence the feelings of the audience. He himself knew how to do this like no one else. He recommended appealing to feelings in connection with certain parts of speech: mainly with the introduction and conclusion. He paid special attention to the use of humor in public speaking. He was convinced that humor is a natural property and cannot be learned; When using humor, you must remember to observe a sense of proportion and the principle of appropriateness.

In the dialogue Brutus, Cicero lists almost all the famous Roman speakers - over two hundred - in chronological order with brief characteristics of each. For Cicero, Roman eloquence is a source of national pride, and he is happy to become its first historian. For Cicero, eloquence is not an end in itself, but only a form of political activity, and the fate of eloquence is inextricably linked with the fate of the state.

The treatise “Orator” should, according to Cicero, answer the question: what is the highest ideal and, as it were, the highest image of eloquence? Cicero says that he translated Demosthenes and Aeschines, two great orators, in order to show his countrymen the standard of eloquence. The ideal speaker is the one who in his speech instructs his listeners, gives them pleasure, and subjugates their will. The first is his duty, the second is the guarantee of his popularity, the third is a necessary condition for success.

Cicero's oratorical theory, which he outlined in The Orator, was a summation of the rich practical experience of previous orators and his own. Much space in the treatise is devoted to the theory of periodic and rhythmic speech. Musicality and rhythm of phrases are one of the most remarkable properties of Cicero’s speech. The rhythm of speech facilitated the path to the hearts of the listeners and thereby contributed to the main task of the speaker - persuasion. Rhythm is created both by a combination of syllables - long and short, and by the choice of words, the order of their arrangement, and the symmetry of expressions. The period - a rhythmic, harmonized phrase - became the subject of close attention of Cicero as a rhetorical theorist and practitioner. An orator must be an artist - and Cicero was one. He followed the existing rules of composition for the entire speech and for each part of it separately with the accuracy with which the circumstances required it. When necessary, he easily neglected them. Favorite techniques of Cicero's style are appeal, rhetorical questions, gradation, pathetic conclusions.

Cicero is the only Roman orator from whom not only theoretical works on rhetoric have come down to us, but also the speeches themselves, etc. a modern researcher has the opportunity to compare theory and practice. The famous teacher and theorist of rhetoric, Quintillian, wrote: “Heaven sent Cicero to earth in order to give an example in him of the extent to which the power of the word can reach.”

The rhetorical ideal corresponds to the general idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe aesthetic and moral; it was formed gradually in culture.

In the Russian tradition, the word was called upon to shape the worldview, bring peace and unity to people, and educate the human soul. Literary monuments of Ancient Rus' gave the word a high status.

The gift of speech and eloquence were perceived as a reward from above - for holiness, worship of God: “There was at that time a certain monk, wise in divine teaching, adorned with holy life and eloquence” (“The Tale of Barlaam and Josaph” 18th century).

What did our ancestors value most in speech behavior? It was important not only the ability to speak, but also the ability to listen to the interlocutor. This requirement is reflected in numerous sayings, proverbs, aphorisms (The word is silver, silence is golden. Know more, but tell me. Saying little, you will hear more).

In Rus', meekness has always been valued (“Keep your eyes down and your soul up”). Blasphemy in conversation, abuse, slander, slander, loud and loud speech, rudeness in speech and verbosity have always been condemned. The “Life” talks about one of the main virtues of Prince Dmitry Ivanovich, that he “did not have idle conversations, did not like obscene words..., avoided rude words in speech, spoke little, but understood a lot.”

The sin of verbosity and the advantage of silence are figuratively commented on in ancient Russian texts. “Let me not be like millstones, for they feed many people, but cannot satisfy themselves with life. May I not find myself hated by the world with my verbose conversation, like a bird frequenting its songs, which they soon begin to hate. For it is said in worldly proverbs: long speech is not good, but long speech is good.

“A silent deed is better than a useless word. Do what is said and do not talk about what has been done,” is written in an ancient Russian teaching.

Respect was considered a virtue, blasphemy was condemned - behind the scenes and in front of the eyes and was condemned as a great sin. In the “Instructions of a Father to His Son” we read: “My son, if you want to achieve a lot in the eyes of God and people, then be respectful to everyone and kind to every person, both behind and in person. If someone is laughed at, praise him and love him.”

A kind word is the first thing you should say to a person. “Don’t let a person pass without greeting him, and say a kind word to him,” says Vladimir Monomakh. “Beware of lies and drunkenness and fornication, because the soul and body perish from this” (“Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh”).

Slander and listening to slander were prohibited and condemned. “The speech of a liar is like the chirping of birds, and only fools listen to him... if someone begins to slander your friend, do not listen to him, otherwise he will tell others about your sins.”

Speech that conveyed the truth, not blasphemy, and free from unkind condemnation was considered worthy. It is better to remain silent than to condemn, and if you condemn, then kindly and with the thought of benefit.

Thus, the oldest monuments of Russian literature allow us to imagine the origins of the Russian speech tradition, a tradition that is deeply moral and worldly wise.

The Old Russian rhetorical ideal of behavior presupposes in communication meekness, humility, love for one's neighbor, respect for him, and the prohibition of false and slanderous words. Speech must be restrained in all respects; shouting, irritation, displays of contempt, condemnation and any blasphemy are not allowed.

In our time, the best speech patterns to this day retain the features of the rhetorical ideal, this is especially clearly represented in the preaching activities of the Orthodox priesthood. For speech patterns fully reflect the value system of national culture.

Mass information gives a person the opportunity for at least relative independence from totalitarian propaganda for the construction of communism or the “universal values” of a democratic “open society.” Modern rhetoric is not just a technical discipline that teaches the ability to construct convincing statements, but a tool of self-defense from totalitarian consciousness. That's why it carries a return...

But these qualities are clearly not enough either to evaluate PR activities, or to control them, or to teach them, or to carry them out in mass, specially organized forms. 1.6. Ethics of rhetoric and ethics of PR PR pseudo-rhetoric has as its real addressee not the audience to which the speech is addressed, but the customer. Its purpose is to “report on the work done” by demonstrating some...

A rhetorical ideal is a general pattern of speech behavior that must be followed. The rhetorical ideal corresponds in its main features to the general ideas about beauty that have developed historically in a given culture.

The category of rhetorical ideal allows us to consider rhetoric and rhetorical knowledge not only as a way of mastering speech, not only as a way of solving communicative speech problems, but also as a way of understanding phenomena of a higher level - the value system of a certain culture, its general aesthetic and ethical ideals.

In other words, the Russian language and the culture of speech in this understanding become a means of understanding reality, improving it through the harmonization of relationships in the process of communication, as well as a means of personal self-improvement.

Each culture develops special and well-defined ideas about how verbal communication should occur. People, joining a culture, “entering” it, receive as one of its components a certain general model - an ideal of speech behavior that needs to be followed, and an idea of ​​​​what a “good” speech work should look like - oral speech or written text .

So, the rhetorical ideal is a system of the most general requirements for speech and speech behavior, historically developed in a particular culture and reflects the system of its values ​​- aesthetic and ethical (moral).

Consequently, in the minds of every person – a bearer of a certain culture – there exists and operates a certain system of values ​​and expectations about how verbal communication should occur in a given situation, “what is good and what is bad” in speech and speech behavior. This system is not random, but natural and historically conditioned. Therefore, the history of rhetoric can be told (and is studied) precisely as the history of rhetorical ideals that emerged, established, and replaced each other.

Russian language and culture of speech of the sophists:

1) manipulative, monologue - “use a catchy word, amaze listeners with unexpected metaphors and oratorical techniques in general, arouse anger and indignation both in an individual and in a crowd, and at the same time, with the help of convincing artistry, calm human suffering” (A. F. Losev);

2) agonal, i.e. Russian language and speech culture of verbal competition, a dispute aimed necessarily at the victory of one and the defeat of the other: “A good speaker is learned in the struggle”;

3) relativistic, that is, the Russian language and culture of speech relativity: truth was not the goal of the sophists, but victory: nothing in the world exists, nothing is permanent, there is no truth, there is only what has been proven.

Thus, the rhetorical ideal of the Sophists is: external form (instead of internal meaning), opinion more important than truth, pleasure more important than virtue.

Socrates' rhetorical ideal is basically similar to Aristotle's:

1. dialogical: not manipulating the addressee, but awakening his thoughts;

2. harmonizing: the main goal is not victory or struggle, but the achievement by the participants of communication of a certain agreement on the meaning, purpose, results of communication; all components of speech form a proportionate whole;

3. semantic: the purpose of speech is the search and discovery of truth, which is not an illusion, but is contained in the subject of conversation and can be discovered.

The rhetorical ideal of ancient classics is associated with the general ideal of beauty that has developed in a given culture. Its main features, according to Losev: richness (“say what is important”), brevity, clarity and simplicity, cheerfulness and life affirmation (joy from communication, reigning harmony).

The rhetorical ideal of Cicero is the ideal of a Stoic philosopher: to suppress all passions, to ignore the ugly in the world, to enjoy the beauty not only and not so much of truth, but of form (language). No “sudden movements”: a measured flow to the best of the decorated word is better. That is why the period - a rhythmic, harmonized phrase - became the subject of close attention of Cicero as a theorist of rhetoric and the favorite rhetorical figure of Cicero the practitioner, Cicero the orator. For Cicero, harmony in speech, in the word, is the result of the suppression of affects, the triumph of rhythm, and the fundamental ignorance of all extremes and dark sides of life.

For Cicero, the orator is a citizen; for Quintilian, he is primarily a stylist; the addressee of Cicero's speeches is the people at the forum, the listener of Quintilian's speeches is a narrow circle of the enlightened. These differences in rhetorical ideals reflect the essential features of changing times.

The movement of rhetorical ideas and, accordingly, the change in the rhetorical ideal is directed from ancient Greek rhetoric (the Sophists, Plato, Aristotle) ​​- to Roman rhetoric - the art of “speaking well” (ars bene dicendi - Cicero and Quintilian) and to the rhetoric of the Middle Ages - the beginning of the Renaissance - the art of " decoration of speech" (ars ornandi), when the main requirement for speech became not only its external, formal beauty and grace, but also correctness, errorlessness, for "our soul will understand better what needs to be done, the more correct the language is praise the Lord without offending him with mistakes” (as stated in the Decrees of Charlemagne).

In ancient Russian eloquence, two main genres predominate - the didactic, teaching word, the purpose of which is the formation of ideals, the education of the human soul and body - “Teaching” - and the “Word”, which treats high and general topics - spiritual, political, state. There was no custom of public discussion in Rus', so polemical eloquence was expressed in letters and messages intended for copying and distribution.

Old Russian eloquence is born on the basis of the interaction of a developed folk oral tradition and ancient, Byzantine and South Slavic rhetorical models, and provides for observance of the basic Christian commandments. The requirements for verbal behavior and speech (words) determined the rhetorical ideal of Ancient Rus': talk only with the worthy; listen to your interlocutor; be meek in conversation; verbosity, idle talk, intemperance in speech, rudeness are sins; worthy speech, bearing the truth, but not blasphemy, alien to unkind condemnation, empty, malicious abuse; a kind word is always desirable and beneficial, but strongly opposed to flattery and lies (praise should not be excessive and false).

The origins of the Russian speech tradition and the Russian speech ideal go back to antiquity (primarily to the rhetorical ideal of Socrates and Plato, to a certain extent - Aristotle and Cicero), in the ethical traditions of Orthodox Christianity, and partly to the rhetoric of Byzantium.

These speech patterns fully reflect the value system of Russian culture, embodied in the traditional rhetorical ideal.

The ethical and aesthetic model of Russian culture implies a special role for the categories of harmony, meekness, humility, peacefulness, non-anger, poise, joy, and is realized in dialogical harmonizing interaction, rhetorical principles of laconicism, calmness, truthfulness, sincerity, benevolence, rhythmic regularity, refusal to shout, slander, gossip, condemnation of one's neighbor.

According to A.K. Michalskaya, formulated in the book “Russian Socrates,” in the modern Russian speech environment, three different origins and different natures of rhetorical ideals exist and struggle.

American (or rather, Americanized). The most common. It is he who is accepted in the media. Goes back to the sophist and is essentially close to it.

The ideal of Soviet rhetoric. Its main qualities are ideological, sloganeering, lack of spirituality, and emasculation.

Old domestic, Russian (finally formed in the 19th century). This is an Eastern Christian ideal. Close to the ideal of Plato and Socrates. For example, in the book by P. S. Porokhovshchikov “The Art of Speech in Court” (St. Petersburg, 1910) a set of “ethical rules for judicial speech” is given. “The first condition for real pathos, as the author writes, is sincerity. You cannot arouse immoral or unworthy feelings in your listeners. You cannot deceive by replacing evidence with influence on feelings...”

Speaker's image

The English word "image" means "image". Each person evokes in others a certain idea of ​​himself, that is, an image. For speakers, an opinion about them is formed based on external data during a speech. Good speech is largely perceived visually. Listeners look closely at the speaker: how he stands, what his facial expression is, what his gait is like, what he does with his hands. Sincere oratory, the speaker's deep experience of mutual communication with the audience, conscientiousness in fulfilling his duty to the audience will give much more for correct external behavior than deliberate technical techniques.

You don't need to be beautiful to be at the top of your game. But when you have to stand up and take the floor, you must be sure that your appearance meets the requirements of the audience and the environment. Do not allow eccentricity in clothing: already all eyes will be directed at you. Men should be clean shaven, empty their pockets of unnecessary items, remove pencils and pens sticking out of the side pocket, and appear in front of the audience smart and buttoned up. Women are advised to leave flashy jewelry at home. Modesty in clothing is preferable to intrusive chic. Don't cause surprise or envy - this will prevent people from listening to what you say.

The proper manners of a speaker are more important than his appearance. He can make listeners forget about their appearance. A group of listeners is more than a group of people. It is subject to the laws of the psychology of attention. Listeners make special demands on the speaker: they have given him the main role. The speaker must take this into account.

He must behave confidently, decisively, but modestly and respectfully towards the audience. Another feature of the psychology of listeners: they feel the need for an intimate and warm atmosphere of a private conversation. The speaker is a living person, not a talking automaton. He must master the ability to create a friendly and at the same time businesslike atmosphere, and be inspired by his convictions. The speaker’s task is to establish contact with the audience.

As soon as the speaker is given the floor, he should not fuss, but calmly go to the chosen place (you must carefully select the place from which you will speak in advance).

Don’t go through your notes as you go, don’t button your jacket, don’t tidy up your hair, don’t straighten your tie. You need to think about all this in advance. Do not start speaking until you are in a comfortable and stable place. Choose one of the accepted behaviors. In the presence of an honored guest, you can address him, calling him by name and patronymic, and then to the audience. But never pile up requests.

When delivering a speech, you must:

Watch your facial expression. The speaker's face should be serious, but not gloomy and aloof. When preparing for a speech, it is necessary to practice in front of a mirror so that you have an idea of ​​facial expressions while delivering a speech. Study your face. If a “frozen” expression appears on it due to tension, practice weakening your facial muscles.

Say phrases rich in various emotions - sadness, joy, inspiration, making sure that your facial expressions also take part in this.

When delivering a speech, you need to pay attention to your posture. Not all speakers know how to stand correctly. The legs should be spaced 15–20 cm apart, depending on height; toes slightly spread; one leg is placed slightly forward, the emphasis is not equal on both legs, in the most expressive places of speech it is on the toes, the knees are flexible and pliable; there is no tension in the shoulders and arms, the arms are not pressed tightly to the chest; the head and neck are moved forward in relation to the chest, the chest is exposed, the stomach is tucked, but not so much that it interferes with freedom of breathing. Shift your emphasis to your right leg, and then step forward with your left, practice taking a step back to one side, to the other, step forward, back; Watch the center of gravity move with each step. More expressive places in speech should be emphasized by moving one step forward or moving one's feet forward; pauses and respites - retreating a short step. Practice standing correctly until you feel a sense of stability, balance, lightness and mobility in the entire posture.

It is almost impossible to speak with passion and conviction without a subtly complex combination of movements of the head, neck, shoulders, torso, hips, arms and legs. Gestures also “speak”, enhancing the emotional sound of speech. Never resort to arbitrary and mechanical gestures. Gestures are:

Expressive (to express emotional movements);

Descriptive (showing the speed and type of movement, size, trend of growth or decline);

Index marks.

Artistic speakers often use imitative gestures.

Rules for using gestures:

Gestures must be involuntary;

Gesticulation does not have to be continuous;

Control your gestures – the gesture should never lag behind the word;

Add variety to your gestures;

Gestures must serve their purpose.

The best feature in a speaker's appearance is correctness. The essential qualities of good public speaking manners are ease, enthusiasm, confidence and a friendly tone. Gestures are any movements that enhance the impression of the speaker's message.

It is necessary to choose the right pace when delivering a speech. The concept of tempo includes:

Speech speed in general;

Duration of sound of individual words;

Intervals, duration of pauses.

Speech speed varies. It depends on the characteristics of the speaker himself and the nature of the language. Try to keep the pace to 150 words per minute. Speech should be leisurely, not too excited, confident, not flabby.

The duration of the sound reflects the depth of experience and shades of meaning. When used correctly, pausing is beneficial in many ways. It makes breathing easier, makes it possible to comprehend the expressed opinion, to figure out what thought to move on to next. A pause is applicable between individual elements of speech (phrases, subordinate clauses, complete judgments), highlights the most significant words, and contributes to the rhythm of oratorical speech.

Sound has a characteristic color (timbre), which is determined by the density, shape and size of the body brought into a state of vibration, and the characteristics of the environment in which it vibrates. There are no two human voices in the entire world that sound alike. It is impossible to completely change the tone of your voice, but you can do a lot to improve it. Like many other things, timbre depends on the mental state of the speaker.

Disadvantages of timbre: shortness of breath, hoarseness, harshness, gutturalness, nasality. All of them can be reduced using special exercises.

In your speech, you need to monitor the correct pronunciation of sounds. You can get rid of poor pronunciation by carefully and systematically studying dictionaries, listening carefully to the speech of educated people, and reading a lot. Bad proclamation should be combatted by listening critically to your speech and persistently practicing to achieve clarity and articulation. The voice should reflect feelings and sensations.

The listed basic knowledge, skills and abilities of the speaker are acquired as a result of hard work and constant training. To neglect this knowledge means not to understand the characteristics of oratory as a complex activity.