Well Spoken

Lately I've been thinking about the value of speaking and writing well. Specifically that it is perhaps not as valuable as it seemed previously. As a younger person, at a certain point you discover words are tools, and not just things you must learn and repeat on command. You learn how many of them there are, and how specific. You learn to change a single word in a sentence and make it more persuasive, more biting, or less likely to get you in trouble. It is easy at this stage to admire people who can use words eloquently and persuasively, and to believe them owners of intelligence and good judgment as well. As time goes on however, it becomes clear that each of these valuable qualities are acquired separately. An intelligent man who speaks well can be so persuasive he gets along without having to develop good judgement. A man with good judgment and intelligence can speak coarsely, can be awkward, can be so in a hurry to express himself when passionate that he stumbles over correct words and grammar.  A man can say a foolish thing very well. It happens all the time, and people are so unsure of themselves that they will trust the judgement of another above their own, if he sounds like he knows what he is saying.

Two examples come to mind on the subject. First, in a Sociology class I once had in college, we were watching news recordings of protests that took place twenty or so years ago. A reporter interviewed a protester about his concerns. The man stumbled terribly, had dreadful sentence structure, clearly wasn't a professional speaker. But after a minute of thought, it seemed to me that his points were very good, very reasonable and not something I had considered before. I expected this to be the general consensus, but that was not the case. In discussion, he was dismissed outright. People complained that someone shouldn't protest if they don't know what they are talking about. In my opinion he did know what he was talking about, but had probably not had the benefit of years of having his speech corrected in school, or hours to spend thinking about perfect wording. He probably did not anticipate being the one person out of thousands to be put on the spot. He very likely felt pressure to express everything in a short window, and in front of so many news viewers.  It is an injustice anytime an unimportant factor in a discussion, for instance grammar, is used to sideline the actual issue.

The second example is one I've been guilty of personally, though I try to avoid it. Frequently I have run across very funny statements or articles detailing the folly of a group of people, a hobby or the holding of a certain opinions, or even just a harmless behavior. Because it is funny, it is easy to ignore the fact that it is incorrect or can't be proven. The behavior is detailed but the motivation or opinion that drives it is prescribed incorrectly. This is usually because the writer/speaker finds it personally annoying, or is angry about a specific person, but trying to seem more valid in their anger, describes it more generally in order to get away with being more vicious without seeming petty.

Perhaps these thoughts are common ones, another phase in maturity. I am hoping to apply it to the many things I hear and see in a day, and gain a better understanding of people and the world in general.