1858.9 口才

shiyi18

Eloquence
SEPTEMBER 1858 ISSUE
SHARE
THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY.

A MAGAZINE OF LITERATURE, ART, AND POLITICS.

VOL. II.— SEPTEMBER, 1858.—NO. XI.

IT is the doctrine of the popular music-masters, that whoever can speak can sing. So, probably, every man is eloquent once in his life. Our temperaments differ in capacity of heat, or we boil at different degrees. One man is brought to the boiling point by the excitement of conversation in the parlor. The waters, of course, are not very deep. He has a two-inch enthusiasm, a pattypan ebullition. Another requires the additional caloric of a multitude, and a public debate; a third needs an antagonist, Or a hot indignation; a fourth needs a revolution; and a fifth, nothing less than the grandeur of absolute ideas, the splendors and shades of Heaven and Hell.

Mint Mobile
Mint Mobile Phone Plans
Get Unlimited Talk & Text + 4GB/mo. 5G-4G LTE Data. Switch to Mint Mobile & Start Saving!
SPONSORED BY MINT MOBILE
See More

But because every man is an orator, how long soever he may have been a mute, an assembly of men is so much more susceptible. The eloquence of one stimulates all the rest, some up to the speaking point, and all others to a degree that makes them good receivers and conductors, and they avenge themselves for their enforced silence by increased loquacity on their return to the fireside.

Magazine Cover image
View This Story as a PDF
See this story as it appeared in the pages of The Atlantic magazine.

Open
The plight of these phlegmatic brains is better than that of those who prematurely boil, and who impatiently break the silence before their time. Our county conventions often exhibit a small-potsoon-hot style of eloquence. We are too much reminded of a medical experiment, where a series of patients are taking nitrous-oxide gas. Each patient, in turn, exhibits similar symptoms,—redness in the face, volubility, violent gestieulation, delirious attitudes, occasional stamping, an alarming loss of pereeption of the passage of time, a selfish enjoyment of his sensations, and loss of perception of the sufferings of the audience. But this lust to speak marks the universal feeling of the energy of the engine, and the curiosity men feel to touch the springs. Of all the musical instruments on which men play, a popular assembly is that which has the largest compass and variety, and out of which, by genius and study, the most wonderful effects can be drawn. An audience is not a simple addition of the individuals that compose it. Their sympathy gives them a certain social organism, which fills each member, in his own degree, and most of all the orator, as a jar in a battery is charged with the whole electricity of the battery. No one can survey the face of an excited assembly, without being apprised of new opportunity for painting in fire human thought, and being agitated to agitate. How many orators sit mute there below ! They come to get justice done to that ear and intuition which no Chatham and no Demosthenes has begun to satisfy.

Plato says, that the punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in the government, is, to live under the government of worse men; and the like regret is suggested to all the auditors, as the penalty of abstaining to speak, that they shall hear worse orators than themselves.

The Welsh Triads say, “Many are the friends of the golden tongue.” Who can wonder at the attractiveness of Parliament, or of Congress, or the bar, for our ambitious young men, when the highest bribes of society are at the feet of the successful orator? He has his audience at his devotion. All other fames must hush before his. He is the true potentate ; for they are not kings who sit on thrones, but they who know how to govern. The definitions of eloquence describe its attraction for young men. Antiphon the Rhamnusian, one of Plutarch’s ten orators, advertised in Athens, “that he would cure distempers of the mind with words.” No man has a prosperity so high or firm, but two or three words can dishearten it. There is no calamity which right words will not begin to redress. Isocrates described his art, as “ the power of magnifying what was small and diminishing what was great”;—an acute, but partial definition. Among the Spartans, the art assumed a Spartan shape, namely, of the sharpest weapon. Socrates says, “ If any one wishes to converse with the meanest of the Lacedaemonians, he will at first find him despicable in conversation; but, when a proper opportunity offers, this same person, like a skilful jaculator, will hurl a sentence worthy of attention, short and contorted, so that he who converses with him will appear to be in no respect superior to a boy.” Plato’s definition of rhetoric is, “ the art of ruling the minds of men.” The Koran says, “ A mountain may change its place, but a man will not change his disposition”;—yet the end of eloquence is,—is it not ?—to alter in a pair of hours, perhaps in a half-hour’s discourse, the convictions and habits of years. Young men, too, are eager to enjoy this sense of added power and enlarged sympathetic existence. The orator sees himself the organ of a multitude, and concentrating their valors and powers:

“ But now the blood of twenty thousand men Blushed in my face.”

RECOMMENDED READING

The Balloonfest That Went Horribly Wrong
EMILY BUDER

What Writers Can Learn From Goodnight Moon
JOE FASSLER
An illustration of upside-down grassy hills topped with cosmic blue spheres
The Universe as We Understand It May Be Impossible
NATALIE WOLCHOVER AND QUANTA MAGAZINE
That which he wishes, that which eloquence ought to reach, is, not a particular skill in telling a story, or neatly summing up evidence, or arguing logically, or dexterously addressing the prejudice of the company; no, but a taking sovereign possession of the audience. Him we call an artist, who shall play on an assembly of men as a master on the keys of the piano,—who, seeing the people furious, shall soften and compose them, shall draw them, when he will, to laughter and to tears. Bring him to his audience, and, be they who they may, coarse or refined, pleased or displeased, sulky or savage, with their opinions in the keeping of a confessor, or with their opinions in their bank-safes,—he will have them pleased and humored as he chooses; and they shall carry and execute that which he bids them.

This is that despotism which poets have celebrated in the “ Pied Piper of Hamelin,” whose music drew like the power of gravitation,—drew soldiers and priests, traders and feasters, women and boys, rats and mice; or that of the minstrel of Meudon, who made the pallbearers dance around the bier. This is a power of many degrees, and requiring in the orator a great range of faculty and experience, requiring a large composite man, such as Nature rarely organizes, so that, in our experience, we are forced to gather up the figure in fragments, here one talent, and there another.

The audience is a constant metre of the orator. There are many audiences in every public assembly, each one of which rules in turn. If anything comic and coarse is spoken, you shall see the emergence of the boys and rowdies, so loud and vivacious, that you might think the house was filled with them. If new topics are started, graver and higher, these roisters recede ; a more chaste and wise attention takes place. You would think the boys slept, and that the men have any degree of profoundness. If the speaker utter a noble sentiment, the attention deepens, a new and highest audience now listens, and the audiences of the fun and of facts and of the understanding are all silenced and awed. There is also something excellent in every audience,—the capacity of virtue. They are ready to be beatified. They know so much more than the orator, —and are so just! There is a tablet there for every line he can inscribe, though he should mount to the highest levels. Humble persons are conscious of new illumination ; narrow brows expand with enlarged affections: delicate spirits, long unknown to themselves, masked and muffled in coarsest fortunes, who now hear their own native language for the first time, and leap to hear it. But all these several audiences, each above each, which successively appear to greet the variety of style and topic, are really composed out of the same persons; nay, sometimes the same individual will take active part in them all, in turn.


This range of many powers in the consummate speaker and of many audiences in one assembly leads us to consider the successive stages of oratory.

Magazine Cover image
Explore the September 1858 Issue
Check out more from this issue and find your next story to read.

View More
Perhaps it is the lowest of the qualities of an orator, but it is, on so many occasions, of chief importance,—a certain robust and radiant physical health, — or, shall I say ? great volumes of animal heat. When each auditor feels himself to make too large a part of the assembly, and shudders with cold at the thinness of the morning audience, and with fear lest all will heavily fail through one bad speech, mere energy and mellowness are then inestimable. Wisdom and learning would be harsh and unwelcome, compared with a substantial cordial man, made of milk, as we say, who is a housewarmer, with his obvious honesty and good meaning, and a hue-and-cry style of harangue, which inundates the assembly with a flood of animal spirits, and makes all safe and secure, so that any and every sort of good speaking becomes at once practicable. I do not rate this animal eloquence very highly, and yet, as we must be fed and warmed before we can do any work well, even the best, so is this semi-animal exuberance, like a good stove, of the first necessity in a cold house.

Climate has much to do with it.—climate and race. Set a New Englander to describe any accident which happened in his presence. What hesitation and reserve in his narrative ! He tells with difficulty some particulars, and gets as fast as he can to the result, and, though he cannot describe, hopes to suggest the whole scene. Now listen to a poor Irishwoman recounting some experience of hers. Her speech flows like a river,— so unconsidered, so humorous, so pathetic, such justice done to all the parts! It is a true transubstantiation,—the fact converted into speech, all warm and colored and alive, as it fell out. Our Southern people are almost all speakers, and have every advantage over the New England people, whose climate is so cold, that, ’tis said, we do not like to open our mouths very wide. But neither can the Southerner in the United States, nor the Irish, compare with the lively inhabitant of the South of Europe. The traveller in Sicily needs no gayer melodramatic exhibition than the table d'hôle of his inn will afford him, in the conversation of the joyous guests. They mimic the voice and manner of the person they describe; they crow, squeal, hiss, cackle, bark, and Scream like mad, and, were it only by the physical strength exerted in telling the story, keep the table in unbounded excitement. But in every constitution some large degree of animal vigor is necessary as material foundation for the higher qualities of the art.


But eloquence must be attractive, or it is none. The virtue of books is to be readable, and of orators to be interesting, and this is a gift of Nature; as Demosthenes, the most laborious student in that kind, signified his sense of this necessity when he wrote, “ Good Fortune,” as his motto on his shield. As we know, the power of discourse of certain individuals amounts to fascination, though it may have no lasting effect. Some portion of this sugar must intermingle. The right eloquence needs no bell to call the people together, and no constable to keep them. It draws the children from their play, the old from their arm-chairs, and the invalid from his warm chamber; it holds the hearer fast, steals away his feet, that he shall not depart,—his memory, that he shall not remember the most pressing affairs,—his belief, that he shall not admit any opposing considerations. The pictures we have of it in semi-barbarous ages, when it has some advantages in the simpler habit of the people, show what it aims at. It is said that the Khans, or story-tellers in Ispahan and other cities of the East, attain a controlling power over their audience, keeping them for many hours attentive to the most fanciful and extravagant adventures. The whole world knows pretty well the style of these improvisators, and how fascinating they are, in our translations of the “ Arabian Nights.” Scheherzarade tells these stories to save her life, and the delight of young Europe and young America in them proves that she fairly earned it. And who does not remember in childhood, some white or black or yellow Scheherzarade, who, by that talent of telling endless feats of fairies and magicians, and kings and queens, was more dear and wonderful to a circle of children than any orator of England or America is now? The more indolent and imaginative complexion of the Eastern nations makes them much more impressible by these appeals to the fancy.


These legends are only exaggerations of real occurrences, and every literature contains these high compliments to the art of the orator and the bard, from the Hebrew and the Greek down to the Scottish Glenkindie, who

—“harpit a fish out o’ saut water,
Or water out of a stone,
Or milk out of a maiden’s breast
Who bairn had never none.”

Homer specially delighted in drawing the same figure. For what is the “Odyssey,” but a history of the orator, in the largest style, carried through a series of adventures furnishing brilliant opportunities to his talent ? See with what care and pleasure the poet brings him on the stage. Helen is pointing out to Antenor, from a tower, the different Grecian chiefs. “ Antenor said: ‘ Tell me, dear child, who is that man, shorter by a head than Agamemnon, yet he looks broader in his shoulders and breast. His arms lie on the ground, but he, like a leader, walks about the bands of the men. He seems to me like a stately ram, who goes as a master of the flock.’ Him answered Helen, daughter of Jove: ‘This is the wise Ulysses, son of Laertes, who was reared in the state of craggy Ithaca, knowing all wiles and wise counsels.’ To her the prudent Antenor replied again: ' O woman, you have spoken truly. For once the wise Ulysses came hither on an embassy, with Menelaus, beloved by Mars. I received them, and entertained them at my house. I became acquainted with the genius and the prudent judgments of both. When they mixed with the assembled Trojans and stood, the broad shoulders of Menelaus rose above the other; but, both sitting, Ulysses was more majestic. When they conversed, and interweaved stories and opinions with all, Menelaus spoke succinctly, few but very sweet words, since he was not talkative, nor superfluous in speech, and was the younger. But when the wise Ulysses arose, and stood, and looked down, fixing his eyes on the ground, and neither moved his sceptre backward nor forward, but held it still, like an awkward person, you would say it was some angry or foolish man ; but when he sent his great voice forth out of his breast, and his words fell like the winter snows, not then would any mortal contend with Ulysses; and we, beholding, wondered not afterwards so much at his aspect.’”1 Thus he does not fail to arm Ulysses at first with this power of overcoming all opposition by the blandishments of speech. Plutarch tells us that Thucydides, when Archidamus, king of Sparta, asked him, Which was the best wrestler, Pericles or he? replied, “When I throw him, he says he was never down, and he persuades the very spectators to believe him.” Philip of Macedon said of Demosthenes, on hearing the report of one of his orations, “ Had I been there, he would have persuaded me to take up arms against myself”; and Warren Hastings said of Burke’s speech on his impeachment, “ As I listened to the orator, I felt for more than half an hour as if I were the most culpable being on earth.”


In these examples, higher qualities have already entered; but the power of detaining the ear by pleasing speech, and addressing the fancy and imagination, often exists without higher merits. Thus separated, as this fascination of discourse aims only at amusement, though it be decisive in its momentary effect, it is yet a juggle, and of no lasting power. It is heard like a band of music passing through the streets, which converts all the passengers into poets, but is forgotten as soon as it has turned the next corner; and unless this oiled tongue could, in Oriental phrase, lick the sun and moon away, it must take its place with opium and brandy. I know no remedy against it but cotton-wool, or the wax which Ulysses stuffed into the ears of his sailors to pass the Sirens safely.

There are all degrees of power, and the least are interesting, but they must not be confounded. There is the glib tongue and cool self-possession of the salesman in a large shop, which, as is well known, overpower the prudence and resolution of housekeepers of both sexes. There is a petty lawyer’s fluency, which is sufficiently impressive to him who is devoid of that talent, though it be, in so many cases, nothing more than a facility of expressing with accuracy and speed what everybody thinks and says more slowly, without new information, or precision of thought,—but the same thing, neither less nor more. It requires no special insight to edit one of our country newspapers. Yet, whoever can say off currently, sentence by sentence, matter neither better nor worse than what is there printed, will be very impressive to our easily-pleased population. These talkers are that class who prosper like the, celebrated schoolmaster, by being only one lesson ahead of the pupil. Add a little sarcasm, and prompt allusion to passing occurrences, and you have the mischievous member of Congress. A spice of malice, a ruffian touch in his rhetoric, will do him no harm with his audience. These accomplishments are of the same kind, and only a degree higher than the coaxing of the auctioneer, or the vituperative style well described in the street-word “jawing.” These kinds of public and private speaking have their use and convenience to the practitioners; but we may say of such collectively, that the habit of oratory is apt to disqualify them for eloquence.


One of our statesmen said, “The curse of this country is eloquent men.” And one cannot wonder at the uneasiness sometimes manifested by trained statesmen, with large experience of public affairs, when they observe the disproportionate advantage suddenly given to oratory over the most solid and accumulated public service. In a Senate or other business committee, the solid result depends on a few men with working talent. They know how to deal with the facts before them, to put things into a practical shape, and they value men only as they can forward the work. But some new man comes there, who has no capacity for helping them at all, is insignificant, and nobody in the committee, but has a talent for speaking. In the debate with open doors, this precious person makes a speech, which is printed, and read all over the Union, and he at once becomes famous, and takes the lead in the public mind over all these executive, men, who, of course, are full of indignation to find one who has no tact or skill, and knows he has none, put over them by means of this talking power which they despise.

Leaving behind us these pretensions, better or worse, to come a little nearer to the verity, eloquence is attractive as an example of the magic of personal ascendency;—a total and resultant power,—rare, because it requires a rich coincidence of powers, intellect, will, sympathy, organs, and, over all, good-fortune in the cause. We have a half-belief that the person is possible who can counterpoise all other persons. We believe that there may be a man who is a match for events,—one who never found his match,—against whom other men being dashed are broken,— one of inexhaustible personal resources, who can give you any odds and beat you. What we really wish for is a mind equal to any exigency. You are safe in your rural district, or in the city, in broad daylight, amidst the police, and under the eyes of a hundred thousand people. But how is it on the Atlantic, in a storm ? Do you understand how to infuse your reason into men disabled by terror, and to bring yourself off safe then? — how among thieves, or among an infuriated populace, or among cannibals? Face to face with a highwayman who has every temptation and opportunity for violence and plunder, can you bring yourself off safe by your wit, exercised through speech?—a problem easy enough to Cæsar, or Napoleon. Whenever a man of that stamp arrives, the highwayman has found a master. What a difference between men in power of face! A man succeeds because he has more power of eye than another, and so coaxes or confounds him. The newspapers, every week, report the adventures of some impudent swindler, who, by steadiness of carriage, duped those who should have known better. Yet any swindlers we have known are novices and bunglers, as is attested by their ill name. A greater power of face would accomplish anything, and, with the rest of their takings, take away the bad name. A greater power of carrying the thing loftily, and with perfect assurance, would confound merchant, banker, judge, men of influence and power, poet, and president, and might head any party, unseat any sovereign, and abrogate any constitution in Europe and America. It was said, that a man has at one step attained vast power, who has renounced his moral sentiment, and settled it with himself that he will no longer stick at anything. It was said of Sir William Pepperel, one of the worthies of New England, that, “ put him where you might, he commanded, and saw what he willed come to pass.” Julius Cæsar said to Metellus, when that tribune interfered to hinder him from entering the Roman treasury, “ Young man, it is easier for me to put you to death than to say that I will ” ; and the youth yielded. In earlier days, he was taken by pirates. What then? He threw himself into their ship; established the most extraordinary intimacies ; told them stories; declaimed to them; if they did not applaud his speeches, he threatened them with hanging,— which he performed afterwards,—and, in a short time, was master of all on board. A man this is who cannot be disconcerted, and so can never play his last card, but has a reserve of power when he has hit his mark. With a serene face, he subverts a kingdom. What is told of him is miraculous; it affects men so. The confidence of men in him is lavish, and he changes the face of the world, and histories, poems, and new philosophies arise to account for him. A supreme commander over all his passions and affections; but the secret of his ruling is higher than that. It is the power of Nature running without impediment from the brain and will into the hands. Men and women are his game. Where they are, he cannot be without resource. “ Whoso can speak well,” said Luther, “is a man.” It was men of this stamp that the Grecian States used to ask of Sparta for generals. They did not send to Lacedæmon for troops, but they said, “ Send us a commander”; and Pausaunias or Gylippus, or Brasidas, or Agis, was despatched by the Ephors.

It is easy to illustrate this overpowering personality by these examples of soldiers and kings; but there are men of the most peaceful way of life, and peaceful principle, who are felt, wherever they go, as sensibly as a July sun or a December frost,—men who, if they speak, are heard, though they speak in a whisper,—who, when they act, act effectually, and what they do is imitated: and these examples may be found on very humble platforms, as well as on high ones.

In old countries, a high money-value is set on the services of men who have achieved a personal distinction. He who has points to carry must hire, not a skilful attorney, but a commanding person. A barrister in England is reputed to have made twenty or thirty thousand pounds per annum in representing the claims of railroad companies before committees of the House of Commons. His clients pay not so much for legal as for manly accomplishments, — for courage, conduct, and a commanding social position, which enable him to make their claims heard and respected.

I know very well, that, among our cool and calculating people, where every man mounts guard over himself, where heats and panics and abandonments are quite out of the system, there is a good deal of skepticism as to extraordinary influence. To talk of an overpowering mind rouses the same jealousy and defiance which one may observe round a table where anybody is recounting the marvellous anecdotes of mesmerism. Each auditor puts a final stroke to the discourse by exclaiming, “ Can be mesmerize me ?" So each man inquires if any orator can change his convictions.

But does any one suppose himself to be quite impregnable ? Does he think that not possibly a man may come to him who shall persuade him out of his most settled determination ?—for example, good sedate citizen as he is, to make a fanatic of him ? or, if he is penurious, to squander money for some purpose he now least thinks of? or, if he is a prudent, industrious person, to forsake his work, and give days and weeks to a new interest? No, he defies any one, every one. Ah! he is thinking of resistance, and of a different turn from his own. But what if one should come of the same turn of mind as his own, and who sees much farther on his own way than he? A man who has tastes like mine, but in greater power, will rule me any day, and make me love my ruler.

Thus it is not powers of speech that we primarily consider under this word Eloquence, but the power that, being present, gives them their perfection, and, being absent, leaves them a merely superficial value. Eloquence is the appropriate organ of the highest personal energy. Personal ascendency may exist with or without adequate talent for its expression. It is as surely felt as a mountain or a planet; but when it is weaponed with a power of Speech, it seems first to become truly human, works actively in all directions, and supplies the imagination with fine materials.

This circumstance enters into every consideration of the power of orators, and is the key to all their effects. In the assembly, you shall find the orator and the audience in perpetual balance, and the predominance of either is indicated by the choice of topic. If the talents for speaking exist, but not the strong personality, then there are good speakers who perfectly receive and express the will of the audience, and the commonest populace is flattered by hearing its low mind returned to it with every ornament which happy talent can add. But if there be personality in the orator, the face of things changes. The audience is thrown into the attitude of pupil, follows like a child its preceptor, and hears what he has to say. It is as if, amidst the king’s council at Madrid, Ximenes urged that an advantage might be gained of France, and Mendoza that Flanders might be kept down, and Columbus, being introduced, was interrogated whether his geographical knowledge could aid the cabinet, and he can say nothing to one party or to the other, but he can show how all Europe can be diminished and reduced under, the king by annexing to Spain a continent as large as six or seven Europes.

This balance between the orator and the audience is expressed in what is called the pertinence of the speaker. There is always a rivalry between the orator and the occasion, between the demands of the hour and the prepossession of the individual. The emergency which has convened the meeting is usually of more importance than anything the debaters have in their minds, and therefore becomes imperative to them. But if one of them have anything of commanding necessity in his heart, how speedily he will find vent for it, and with the applause of the assembly ! This balance is observed in the privatest intercourse. Poor Tom never knew the time when the present occurrence was so trivial that he could tell what was passing in his mind without being checked for unseasonable speech ; but let Bacon speak, and wise men would rather listen, though the revolution of kingdoms was on foot. I have heard it. reported of an eloquent preacher, whose voice is not yet forgotten in this city, that, on occasions of death or tragic disaster, which overspread the congregation with gloom, he ascended the pulpit with more than his usual alacrity, and, turning to his favorite lessons of devout and jubilant thankfulness, “ Let us praise the Lord,” carried audience, mourners, and mourning along with him, and swept away all the impertinence of private sorrow with his hosannas and songs of praise. Pepys says of Lord Clarendon, with whom “ he is mad in love,” on his return from a conference, “ I did never observe how much easier a man do speak when he knows all the company to be below him, than in him; for, though he spoke indeed excellent well, yet his manner and freedom of doing it, as if he played with it, and was informing only all the rest of the company, was mighty pretty.” 2

This rivalry between the orator and the occasion is inevitable, and the occasion always yields to the eminence of the speaker; for a great man is the greatest of occasions. Of course, the interest of the audience and of the orator conspire. It is well with them only when his influence is complete; then only they are well pleased. Especially, he consults his power by making instead of taking his theme. If he should attempt to instruct the people in that which they already know, he would fail; but, by making them wise in that which he knows, he has the advantage of the assembly every moment. Napoleon’s tactics of marching on the angle of an army, and always presenting a superiority of numbers, is the orator’s secret also.

The several talents which the orator employs, the splendid weapons which went to the equipment of Demosthenes, of Æschines, of Demades, the natural orator, of Fox, of Pitt, of Patrick Henry, of Adams, of Mirabeau, deserve a special enumeration. We must not quite omit to name the principal pieces.

The orator, as we have seen, must be a substantial personality. Then, first, he must have power of statement,— must have the fact, and know how to tell it. In any knot of men conversing on any subject, the person who knows most about it will have the ear of the company, if he wishes it, and lead the conversation, -—no matter what genius or distinction other men there present may have; and in any public assembly, him who has the facts, and can and will state them, people will listen to, though he is otherwise ignorant, though he is hoarse and ungraceful, though he stutters and screams.

In a court of justice, the audience are impartial; they really wish to sift the statements, and know what the truth is. And, in the examination of witnesses, there usually leap out, quite unexpectedly, three or four stubborn words or phrases which are the pith and fate of the business, which sink into the ear of all parties, and stick there, and determine the cause. All the rest is repetition and qualifying; and the court and the county have really come together to arrive at these three or four memorable expressions, which betrayed the mind and meaning of somebody.

In every company, the man with the fact is like the guide you hire to lead your party up a mountain or through a difficult country. He may not compare with any of the party in mind, or breeding, or courage, or possessions, but he is much more important to the present need than any of them. That is what we go to the court-house for,—the statement of the fact, and the elimination of a general fact, the real relation of all the parties; and it is the certainty with which, indifferently in any affair that is well handled, the truth stares us in the face, through all the disguises that are put upon it,—a piece of the well-known human life,—that makes the interest of a court-room to the intelligent spectator.

I remember, long ago, being attracted by the distinction of the counsel, and the local importance of the cause, into the court-room. The prisoner’s counsel were the strongest and cunningest lawyers in the Commonwealth. They drove the attorney for the State from corner to corner, taking his reasons from under him, and reducing him to silence, but not to submission. When hard-pressed, he revenged himself, in his turn, on the judge, by requiring the court to define what salvage was. The court, thus pushed, tried words, and said everything it could think of to fill the time, supposing cases, and describing duties of insurers, captains, pilots, and miscellaneous sea-officers that are or might be,—like a schoolmaster puzzled by a hard sum, who reads the context with emphasis. But all this flood not serving the cuttle-fish to get away in, the horrible shark of the district-attorney being still there, grimly awaiting with his “ The court must define,”—the poor court pleaded its inferiority. The superior court must establish the law for this, and it read away piteously the decisions of the Supreme Court, but read to those who had no pity. The judge was forced at last to rule something, and the law- yers saved their rogue under the fog of a definition. The parts were so well cast and discriminated, that it was as interesting game to watch. The government was well enough represented. It was stupid, but it had a strong will and possession, and stood on that to the last. The judge had a task beyond his preparation, yet his position remained real; he was there to represent a great reality, the justice of states, which we could well enough see beetling over his head, and which his trifling talk nowise affected, and did not impede, since he was entirely well-meaning.

The statement of the fact, however, sinks before the statement of the law, which requires immeasurably higher powers, and is a rarest gift, being in all great masters one and the same thing,-—in lawyers, nothing technical, but always some piece of common sense, alike interesting to laymen as to clerks. Lord Mansfield’s merit is the merit of common sense. It is the same quality we admire in Aristotle, Montaigne, Cervantes, or in Samuel Johnson, or Franklin. Its application to law seems quite accidental. Each of Mansfield’s famous decisions contains a level sentence or two, which hit the mark. His sentences are not always finished to the eye, but are finished to the mind. The sentences are involved, but a solid proposition is set forth, a true distinction is drawn. They come from and they go to the sound human understanding; and I read, without surprise, that the black-letter lawyers of the day sneered at his " equitable decisions,” as if they were not also learned. This, indeed, is what speech is for, to make the statement; and all that is called eloquence seems to me of little use, for the most part, to those who have it, but inestimable to such as have something to say.

Next to the knowledge of the fact and its law, is method, which constitutes the genius and efficiency of all remarkable men. A crowd of men go up to Faneuil Hall; they are all pretty well acquainted with the object of the meeting ; they have all read the facts in the same newspapers. The orator possesses no information which his hearers have not; yet he teaches them to see the thing with his eyes. By the new placing, the circumstances acquire new solidity and worth. Every fact gains consequence by his naming it, and trifles become important, His expressions fix themselves in men’s memories, and fly from month to month. His mind has some new principle of order. Where he looks, all things fly into their places. What will he say next? Let this man speak, and this man only. By applying the habits of a higher style of thought to the common affairs of this world, he introduces beauty and magnificence wherever he goes. Such a power was Burke’s, and of this genius we have had some brilliant examples in our own political and legal men.

Imagery. The orator must be, to a certain extent, a poet. We are such imaginative creatures, that nothing so works on the human mind, barbarous or civil, as a trope. Condense some daily experience into a glowing symbol, and an audience is electrified. They feel as if they already possessed some new right and power over a fact, which they can detach, and so completely master in thought. It is a wonderful aid to the memory, which, carries away the image, and never loses it. A popular assembly, like the House of Commons, or the French Chamber, or the American Congress, is commanded by these two powers,—-first by a fact, then by skill of statement. Put the argument into a concrete shape, into an image, some hard phrase, round and solid as a ball, which they can see and handle and carry home with them, and the cause is half won.

Statement, method, imagery, selection, tenacity of memory, power of dealing with facts, of illuminating them, of sinking them by ridicule or by diversion of the mind, rapid generalization, humor, pathos, are keys which the orator holds; and yet these fine gifts are not eloquence, and do often hinder a man’s attainment of it. And if we come to the heart of the mystery, perhaps we should say that the truly eloquent man is a sane man with power to communicate his sanity. If you arm the man with the extraordinary weapons of this art, give him a grasp of facts, learning, quick fancy, sarcasm, splendid allusion, interminable illustration,—all these talents, so potent and charming, have an equal power to insnare and mislead the audience and the orator. His talents are too much for him, his horses run away with him; and people always perceive whether you drive, or whether the horses take the bits in their teeth and run. But these talents are quite something else when they are subordinated and serve him; and we go to Washington, or to Westminster Hall, or might well go round the world, to see a man who drives, and is not run away with,—a man who, in prosecuting great designs, has an absolute command of the moans of representing his ideas, and uses them only to express these ; placing facts, placing men ; amid the inconceivable levity of human beings, never for an instant warped from his erectness. There is for every man a statement possible of that truth which he is most unwilling to receive,—a statement possible, so broad and so pungent, that he cannot get away from it, but must either bend to it or die of it. Else there would be no such word as eloquence, which means this. The listener cannot hide from himself that something has been shown him and the whole world, which he did not wish to see ; and, as he cannot dispose of it, it disposes of him. The history of public men and affairs in America will readily furnish tragic examples of this fatal force.

For the triumphs of the art somewhat more must still be required, namely, a reinforcing of man from events, so as to give the double force of reason and destiny. In transcendent eloquence, there was ever some crisis in affairs, such as could deeply engage the man to the cause he pleads, and draw all this wide power to a point. For the explosions and eruptions, there must be accumulations of heat somewhere, beds of ignited anthracite at the centre. And in cases where profound conviction has been wrought, the eloquent man is he who is no beautiful speaker, but who is inwardly drunk with a certain belief. It agitates and tears him, and perhaps almost bereaves him of the power of articulation. Then it rushes from him as in short, abrupt screams, in torrents of meaning. The possession the subject has of his mind is so entire, that it insures an order of expression which is the order of Nature itself, and so the order of greatest force, and inimitable by any art. And the main distinction between him and other well-graced actors is the conviction, communicated by every word, that his mind is contemplating a whole and inflamed by the contemplation of the whole, and that the words and sentences uttered by him, however admirable, fall from him as unregarded parts of that terrible whole which he sees, and which he means that you shall see. Add to this concentration a certain regnant calmness, which, in all the tumult, never utters a premature syllable, but keeps the secret of its means and method; and the orator stands before the people as a demoniacal power to whose miracles they have no key. This terrible earnestness makes good the ancient superstition of the hunter, that the bullet will hit its mark, which is first dipped in the marksman’s blood.

Eloquence must be grounded on the plainest narrative. Afterwards, it may warm itself until it exhales symbols of every kind and color, speaks only through the most poetic forms; but, first and last, it must still be at bottom a biblical statement of fact. The orator is thereby an orator, that he keeps his feet ever on a fact. Thus only is he invincible. No gifts, no graces, no power of wit or learning or illustration will make any amends for want of this. All audiences are just to this point. Fame of voice or of rhetoric will carry people a few times to hear a speaker, hut they soon begin to ask, “ What is he driving at?” and if this man does not stand for anything, he will be deserted. A good upholder of anything which they believe, a fact-speaker of any kind, they will long follow; but a pause in the speaker’s own character is very properly a loss of attraction. The preacher enumerates his classes of men, and I do not find my place therein ; I suspect, then, that no man does. Every thing is my cousin, and whilst lie speaks things, I feel that he is touching some of my relations, and I am uneasy ; but whilst he deals in words, we are released from attention. If you would lift me, you must be on higher ground. If you would liberate me, you must he free. If you would correct my false view of facts,— hold up to me the same facts in the true order of thought, and 1 cannot go back from the new conviction.

The power of Chatham, of Pericles, of Luther, rested on this strength of character, which, because it did not and could not fear anybody, made nothing of their antagonists, and became sometimes exquisitely provoking and sometimes terrific to these.

We are slenderly furnished with anecdotes of these men, nor can we help ourselves by those heavy books in which their discourses are reported. Some of them were writers, like Burke ; but most of them were not, and no record at all adequate to their fame remains. Besides, what is best is lost, the fiery life of the moment. But the conditions for eloquence always exist. It is always dying out of famous places, and appearing in corners. Wherever the polarities meet, wherever the fresh moral sentiment, the instinct of freedom and duty, come in direct opposition to fossil conservatism and the thirst of gain, the spark will pass. The resistance to slavery in this country has been a fruitful nursery of orators. The natural connection by which it drew to itself a train of moral reforms, and the slight yet sufficient party organization it offered, reinforced the city with new blood from the woods and mountains. Wild men, John Baptists, Hermit Peters, John Knoxes, utter the savage sentiment of Nature in the heart of commercial capitals. They send us every year some piece of aboriginal strength, some tough oak-stick of a man who is not to be silenced or insulted or intimidated by a mob, because he is more mob than they, —one who mobs the mob,—some sturdy countryman, on whom neither money, nor politeness, nor hard words, nor eggs, nor blows, nor brickbats, make any impression. He is fit to meet the bar-room wits and bullies; he is a wit and a bully himself, and something more; he is a graduate of the plough, and the stub-hoe, and the bush-whacker; knows all the secrets of swamp and snow-bank, and has nothing to learn of labor or poverty or the rough of farming. His hard head went through in childhood the drill of Calvinism, with text and mortification, so that he stands in the New England assembly a purer bit of New England than any, and flings his sarcasms right and left. He has not only the documents in his pocket to answer all cavils and to prove all his positions, but he has the eternal reason in his head. This man scornfully renounces your civil organizations,—county, or city, or governor, or army,—is his own navy and artillery, judge and jury, legislature and executive. He has learned his lessons in a bitter school. Yet, if the pupil be of a texture to bear it, the best university that can be recommended to a man of ideas is the gauntlet of the mobs.


He who will train himself to mastery in this science of persuasion must lay the emphasis of education, not on popular arts, but on character and insight. Let him see that his speech is not differenced from action; that, when he has spoken, he has not done nothing, nor done wrong, but has cleared his own skirts, has engaged himself to wholesome exertion. Let him look on opposition as opportunity. He cannot be defeated or put down. There is a principle of resurrection in him, an immortality of purpose. Men arc averse and hostile, to give value to their suffrages. It is not the people that are in fault for not being convinced, but he that cannot convince them. He should mould them, armed as he is with the reason and love which are also the core of their nature. He is not to neutralize their opposition, but he is to convert them into fiery apostles and publishers of the same wisdom.

The highest platform of eloquence is the moral sentiment. It is what is called affirmative truth, and has the property of invigorating the hearer; and it conveys a hint of our eternity, when he feels himself addressed on grounds which will remain when everything else is taken, and which have no trace of time or place or party. Everything hostile is stricken down in the presence of the sentiments; their majesty is felt by the most obdurate. It is observable, that, as soon as one acts for large masses, the moral element will and must be allowed for, will and must work; and the men least accustomed to appeal to these sentiments invariably recall them when they address nations. Napoleon, even, must accept and use it as he can.


It is only to these simple strokes that the highest power belongs, when a weak human hand touches, point by point, the eternal beams and rafters on which the whole structure of Nature and society is laid. In this tossing sea of delusion, we feel with our feet the adamant; in this dominion of chance, we find a principle of permanence. For I do not accept that definition of Isocrates, that the office of his art is to make the great small and the small great; but I esteem this to be its perfection,—when the orator sees through all masks to the eternal scale of truth, in such sort that he can hold up before the eyes of men the fact of today steadily to that standard, thereby making the great great and the small small, which is the true way to astonish and to reform mankind.

All the first orators of the world have been grave men, relying on this reality. One thought the philosophers of Demosthenes’s own time found running through all his orations,—this, namely, that “ virtue secures its own success.” “ To stand on one’s own feet” Heeren finds the keynote to the discourses of Demosthenes, as of Chatham.

Eloquence, like every other art, rests on laws the most exact and determinate. It is the best speech of the best soul. It may well stand as the exponent of all that is grand and immortal in the mind. If it do not so become an instrument, but aspires to be somewhat of itself, and to glitter for show, it is false and weak. In its right exercise, it is an elastic, unexhausted power,—who has sounded, who has estimated it ?—expanding with the expansion of our interests and affections. Its great masters, whilst they valued every help to its attainment, and thought no pains too great which contributed in any manner to further it, and, resembling the Arabian warrior of fame, who wore seventeen weapons in his belt, and in personal combat used them all occasionally,— yet undervalued all means, never permitted any talent, neither voice, rhythm, poetic power, anecdote, sarcasm, to appear for show, but were grave men, who preferred their integrity to their talent, and esteemed that object for which they toiled, whether the prosperity of their country, or the laws, or a reformation, or liberty of speech or of the press, or letters, or morals, as above the whole world, and themselves also.

Iliad, III. 192.↩
Diary, I. 469.↩




口才
1858年9月号
分享
The Atlantic Monthly.

一本关于文学、艺术和政治的杂志。

第二卷 II. - September, 1858.-no. XI.

流行音乐大师们的理论是，谁能说话谁就能唱歌。因此，每个人一生中可能都会有一次雄辩的机会。我们的性情不同，热度也不同，或者说我们的沸腾程度不同。有一个人因为在客厅里谈话的刺激而达到沸点。当然，水不是很深。他有一种两英寸的热情，是一种Pattypan ebullition。另一个人需要众人的额外热量，以及一场公开辩论；第三个人需要一个对手，或者一场激烈的愤怒；第四个人需要一场革命；第五个人则需要绝对思想的宏伟，天堂和地狱的辉煌和阴影。

薄荷手机
Mint Mobile 电话计划
获得无限通话和短信+4GB/月。5G-4G LTE数据。切换到Mint Mobile并开始节省!
由Mint Mobile赞助
查看更多

但由于每个人都是演说家，无论他当哑巴多久，男人的集会都更容易受到影响。一个人的口才刺激了所有其他人，有些人达到了说话的程度，而所有其他人则达到了使他们成为好的接受者和引导者的程度，他们在回到炉边时通过增加口才来报复自己被强迫的沉默。

杂志封面图片
以PDF格式查看本故事
请看这个故事在《大西洋》杂志的页面上出现。

打开
这些沉默寡言的人的困境比那些过早沸腾的人要好，他们不耐烦地在时间面前打破沉默。我们的县级会议经常表现出一种小锅饭式的雄辩。我们过多地想起了一个医学实验，一系列病人正在服用亚硝酸盐气体。每个病人依次表现出类似的症状--面色苍白、易怒、剧烈消化、神志不清、偶尔跺脚、对时间流逝失去警觉、自私地享受自己的感觉、对听众的痛苦失去知觉。但这种说话的欲望标志着人们对发动机能量的普遍感受，以及人们对触摸弹簧的好奇心。在人们演奏的所有乐器中，大众集会是拥有最大范围和种类的乐器，而且通过天才和研究，可以从中获得最美妙的效果。听众并不是组成它的个人的简单补充。他们的同情心给了他们某种社会有机体，它在自己的程度上充满了每个成员，而最重要的是演说者，就像电池中的一个罐子被注入了电池的全部电力。没有人能够在一个激动人心的集会中，不被告知有新的机会来描绘人类的思想，并被鼓动来鼓动。有多少演说家坐在下面沉默不语! 他们是来为那没有查塔姆和德摩斯梯尼开始满足的耳朵和直觉讨回公道的。

柏拉图说，明智的人拒绝参与政府，所遭受的惩罚是，生活在更糟糕的人的政府之下；同样的遗憾也向所有听众提出，作为放弃发言的惩罚，他们将听到比自己更糟糕的演说家。

威尔士三联书店说："许多人是金口玉言的朋友"。当社会上最高的贿赂都在成功的演说家的脚下时，谁能怀疑议会、国会或律师界对我们这些雄心勃勃的年轻人的吸引力？他有他的听众，有他的奉献。所有其他的名声在他面前都必须噤若寒蝉。他才是真正的君主；因为他们不是坐在宝座上的国王，而是懂得如何治理的人。口才的定义描述了它对年轻人的吸引力。普鲁塔克的十位演说家之一的拉姆努斯人安提丰在雅典宣传说："他将用语言治疗心灵的创伤"。没有人有如此高大或坚定的繁荣，但两三句话就能使它失去动力。没有什么灾难是正确的语言所不能解决的。伊索克拉底把他的艺术描述为 "放大小的东西，缩小大的东西的能力"；这是一个尖锐但不全面的定义。在斯巴达人中，这种艺术具有斯巴达人的特点，即最锋利的武器。苏格拉底说："如果有人想和拉凯戴蒙人中最卑鄙的人交谈，他起初会发现他在谈话中很卑鄙；但是，一旦有了适当的机会，这个人就会像一个娴熟的戏子一样，掷地有声地说出值得注意的句子，简短而扭曲，这样，与他交谈的人就会显得在任何方面都比不上一个男孩。" 柏拉图对修辞的定义是："统治人的思想的艺术"。古兰经》说："山可以改变它的位置，但人不会改变他的性情。"然而，雄辩的目的是--不是吗？--在一对小时内，也许在半小时的谈话中，改变多年的信念和习惯。年轻人也渴望享受这种增加力量和扩大同情心的存在感。演说家认为自己是众人的器官，并集中了他们的勇气和力量。

" 但现在两万多人的鲜血在我脸上泛红。"

推荐阅读

错得离谱的气球节
爱弥儿-布德

作家可以从《晚安月》中学到什么
JOE FASSLER
一幅颠倒的草山插图，上面是宇宙的蓝色球体
我们所理解的宇宙可能是不可能的
娜塔莉-沃尔乔弗和《量子》杂志
他所希望的，口才应该达到的，不是讲故事的特殊技巧，不是整齐地总结证据，不是逻辑地争论，也不是巧妙地处理公司的偏见；不是，而是对听众的主权占有。我们称他为艺术家，他将像大师在钢琴键上演奏一样在人们的集会上演奏，--他看到人们怒气冲冲，将软化和调和他们，在他愿意时，将他们引向笑声和泪水。把他带到他的听众面前，不管他们是谁，是粗俗的还是高雅的，是高兴的还是不高兴的，是生闷气的还是野蛮的，是把他们的意见放在忏悔者那里，还是把他们的意见放在银行保险箱里，他都会按照他的选择让他们高兴和幽默；他们将执行他所吩咐的事情。

这就是诗人在 "哈梅林的魔笛手 "中颂扬的专制主义，他的音乐像引力一样吸引着士兵和牧师、商人和主人、妇女和男孩、老鼠和老鼠；或者莫东的吟游诗人，他让抬棺人在棺材周围跳舞。这是一种具有多种程度的能力，需要演说家具有广泛的能力和经验，需要一个大型的复合型人才，如大自然很少组织的那样，因此，在我们的经验中，我们被迫在碎片中收集这个人物，这里有一个人才，那里有另一个人才。

听众是演说家的一个不变的节拍。在每一个公共集会中都有许多听众，每一个听众都轮流统治。如果说的是滑稽和粗俗的东西，你会看到男孩和暴徒的出现，如此响亮和活泼，以至于你会认为房子里都是他们。如果开始了新的话题，更严肃和更高的话题，这些吵闹的人就会退去；会出现一种更贞洁和明智的关注。你会认为男孩们在睡觉，而男人们则有任何程度的深刻性。如果演讲者说出了高尚的情感，人们的注意力就会加深，一个新的、最高级的听众就会倾听，而那些有趣的、事实的和理解的听众都会安静下来，感到震惊。在每个听众中也有一些优秀的东西，即美德的能力。他们已经准备好接受洗礼了。他们比演说家知道的多得多，而且是如此的公正! 尽管他要爬到最高层，但他的每一句话都有一个石碑可以刻。卑微的人意识到了新的光亮；狭窄的眉头随着扩大的情感而扩大：长久以来不为人知的、被掩盖在最粗糙的财富中的精致的精神，现在第一次听到自己的母语，并为之雀跃。但是，所有这几个听众，每个人都在每个人之上，他们相继出现，迎接各种风格和主题，实际上是由同一个人组成的；不，有时同一个人将轮流积极参加所有这些活动。


这种在完美的演讲者身上的多种能力和在一个集会中的多种听众的范围使我们考虑到演说的连续阶段。

杂志封面图片
探索1858年9月号
查看本期的更多内容，并找到你要阅读的下一个故事。

查看更多
也许这是演说家的最低素质，但在许多场合，它是最重要的--某种健壮而有光泽的身体健康，--或者，我应该说？ 大量的动物热量。当每个听众都觉得自己在集会中占的比例太大，并为早上听众的稀少而感到寒冷，以及担心所有的人都会因为一次糟糕的演讲而严重失败时，单纯的精力和温和的态度是不可估量的。智慧和学识将是苛刻和不受欢迎的，与一个实质性的亲切的人相比，就像我们所说的，他是一个家庭主妇，他有明显的诚实和良好的意义，以及一种喧嚣的演讲风格，用动物精神的洪水淹没了集会，并使所有的安全和保障，所以任何和每一种好的演讲立即变得切实可行。我对这种动物性的口才评价不高，然而，正如我们在做好任何工作，甚至是最好的工作之前，必须得到食物和温暖一样，这种半动物性的旺盛，就像一个好炉子一样，是寒冷的房子里的第一需要。

气候与此有很大关系--气候和种族。让一个新英格兰人描述在他面前发生的任何事故。他的叙述是多么的犹豫和保留！他艰难地讲述了一些细节。他艰难地讲述了一些细节，并尽可能快地得出结果，虽然他无法描述，但希望能暗示整个场景。现在听一个可怜的爱尔兰妇女讲述她的一些经历。她的话语像河流一样流淌，--如此未经深思熟虑，如此幽默，如此可悲，如此公正地对待所有的部分！这就是真正的变体。这是一个真正的转世，--事实转化为语言，所有的温暖和色彩，活生生的，因为它掉了出来。我们的南方人几乎都会说话，而且比新英格兰人更有优势，因为新英格兰的气候非常寒冷，据说我们不喜欢把嘴张得很大。但无论是美国的南方人还是爱尔兰人，都无法与欧洲南部的活泼居民相比。在西西里的旅行者不需要比他旅馆的餐桌提供给他的欢乐客人的谈话更多的戏剧性展示。他们模仿他们所描述的人的声音和方式；他们像疯了一样啼哭、尖叫、嘎嘎叫、吠叫，而且，如果只是靠讲故事时的体力，就能让桌子上的人无限制地兴奋起来。但在每一种体质中，某种程度的动物活力是必要的，它是艺术的高级品质的物质基础。


但是，口才必须具有吸引力，否则它就不是口才。书籍的美德是可读，演说家的美德是有趣，这是大自然的恩赐；正如德摩斯梯尼，这个在这方面最努力的学生，在他的盾牌上写下 "好运 "作为他的座右铭时，表明他对这种必要性的认识。正如我们所知，某些人的话语权相当于魅力，尽管它可能没有持久的效果。这种糖的某些部分必须交融在一起。正确的口才不需要用钟声把人们召集起来，也不需要用警员来约束他们。它把儿童从他们的游戏中拉出来，把老人从他们的扶手椅上拉出来，把病人从他温暖的房间里拉出来；它把听众紧紧抓住，偷走他的脚，使他不能离开，偷走他的记忆，使他不能记住最紧迫的事情，偷走他的信念，使他不能接受任何反对的考虑。在半野蛮的时代，当它在人们的简单习惯中具有一些优势时，我们所拥有的关于它的图片显示了它的目的。据说，在伊斯法罕和东方其他城市的Khans（即讲故事的人）对他们的听众有一种控制力，使他们在许多小时内专注于最虚幻和最奢侈的冒险。在我们翻译的《一千零一夜》中，全世界都很清楚这些即兴表演者的风格，以及他们是多么迷人。谢尔扎拉德讲这些故事是为了保命，年轻的欧洲人和年轻的美国人对这些故事的喜爱，证明她是值得的。谁不记得在童年时，一些白色、黑色或黄色的Scheherzarade，由于她有讲不完的仙女和魔术师、国王和王后的才能，对一圈孩子来说，比现在英国或美国的任何演说家都更亲切和精彩？东方民族更加懒散和富有想象力的特点使他们更容易被这些对想象力的呼吁所打动。


这些传说只是对真实事件的夸张，每一种文学作品都包含了对演说家和吟游诗人艺术的高度赞扬，从希伯来人和希腊人到苏格兰的Glenkindie，都是如此。

-"从煮熟的水里捞出一条鱼。
或从石头中取出水来。
或从少女的乳房中挤出牛奶
谁的孩子从来没有过"。

荷马特别喜欢画同样的人物。因为 "奥德赛 "是什么，不过是一部演说家的历史，以最大的风格，通过一系列的冒险，为他的才能提供了辉煌的机会？请看诗人是如何小心翼翼地把他带到舞台上的。海伦在塔楼上向安特诺指出不同的希腊酋长。安特诺说："亲爱的孩子，告诉我，那个人是谁，比阿伽门农矮一个头，但他的肩膀和胸部看起来更宽。他的双臂躺在地上，但他像个领袖一样，在男人们的队伍中走来走去。在我看来，他就像一只庄严的公羊，像羊群的主人一样走动。乔夫的女儿海伦回答说：'这是聪明的尤利西斯，拉埃特斯的儿子，他在峭壁上的伊萨卡州长大，知道所有的诡计和明智的计策。谨慎的安特诺尔又回答她说：'女人啊，你说得真好。因为有一次，聪明的尤利西斯带着玛尔斯所爱的米奈劳斯来此出使。我接待了他们，并在我家里招待了他们。我认识了他们的天才和谨慎的判断力。当他们与聚集在一起的特洛伊人混合站立时，米奈劳斯宽阔的肩膀高于对方；但是，他们都坐着，尤利西斯更有威严。当他们交谈，并与大家交织故事和意见时，米奈劳斯说得很简洁，话语不多，但很动听，因为他不爱说话，也不善于说话，而且比较年轻。但是，当聪明的尤利西斯站起来，站着，低着头，眼睛盯着地面，既不向后也不向前移动他的权杖，而是像一个笨拙的人一样拿着它不动，你会说这是一些愤怒或愚蠢的人；但当他从胸中发出巨大的声音，他的话像冬天的雪一样落下，那时没有一个凡人会与尤利西斯争论；我们看了，后来对他的样子不那么奇怪了。 '"1 因此，他并没有在一开始就把尤利西斯的这种通过语言的诱惑来战胜一切反对的力量武装起来。普鲁塔克告诉我们，修昔底德在斯巴达国王阿基达摩斯问他，伯里克利和他哪个是最好的摔跤手时，回答说："当我把他扔出去时，他说他从来没有倒下过，他说服了非常多的观众相信他。" 马其顿的菲利普在听到德摩斯梯尼的一次演讲报告时说："如果我在那里，他会说服我拿起武器反对自己"；沃伦-黑斯廷斯在谈到伯克关于他的弹劾的演讲时说："当我听着这位演说家时，我有半个多小时感到自己好像是地球上最有罪的人。"


在这些例子中，更高的品质已经进入；但是，通过悦耳的言语来吸引耳朵，并解决幻想和想象的能力，往往没有更高的优点也存在。因此，由于这种话语的魅力只是为了娱乐，尽管它在瞬间的效果上是决定性的，但它仍然是一种杂耍，没有持久的力量。它就像一队经过街道的音乐，把所有的乘客都变成了诗人，但一转弯就被遗忘了；除非这条涂满油彩的舌头能用东方人的话说，把太阳和月亮舔掉，否则它必须和鸦片和白兰地一样被取代。除了棉絮，或者尤利西斯为安全通过塞壬而塞进水手耳朵里的蜡，我不知道有什么补救办法。

权力有各种程度，最小的也很有趣，但不能把它们混为一谈。大商店里的售货员巧舌如簧，冷静自持，众所周知，他们压倒了男女管家的审慎和果断。有一种小律师的流畅性，对于没有这种才能的人来说，这足以令人印象深刻，尽管在许多情况下，它只不过是一种便利，能够准确而迅速地表达每个人的想法和说法，速度较慢，没有新的信息，或思想的精确性，但同样的事情，既不少也不多。编辑我们的一份乡村报纸不需要特别的洞察力。然而，谁能把目前的情况逐句说出来，既不比印刷的内容好，也不比印刷的内容差，就会给我们容易取悦的民众留下深刻印象。这些说话的人是那一类人，他们像著名的校长一样，只比学生早一节课就能获得成功。再加上一点讽刺，以及对过往事件的及时影射，你就有了调皮的国会议员。在他的修辞中加入恶意的调料和无赖的触觉，对他的听众没有任何伤害。这些成就是同类的，只是比拍卖师的哄骗，或街头用语 "瞠目结舌 "所描述的谩骂风格要高一个等级。这些公开和私下的讲话对练习者来说都有其用处和方便之处；但我们可以说，对于这些人来说，演说的习惯很可能会使他们失去雄辩的资格。


我们的一位政治家说："这个国家的诅咒是雄辩的人。当训练有素的政治家，在公共事务方面有丰富的经验，当他们观察到突然给予演说以不相称的优势，而不是最坚实和积累的公共服务时，人们不会怀疑他们所表现出的不安。在参议院或其他商业委员会中，坚实的结果取决于少数具有工作才能的人。他们知道如何处理他们面前的事实，把事情变成实际的形状，他们只重视能够推动工作的人。但有些新人来到那里，根本没有帮助他们的能力，无足轻重，在委员会中无人问津，但却有说话的天赋。在开门见山的辩论中，这个宝贵的人发表了一篇演讲，这篇演讲被印刷出来，在整个联邦都能读到，他一下子就出名了，在公众心目中领先于所有这些执行者，当然，他们发现一个没有策略和技巧的人，而且知道自己没有，通过这种他们鄙视的说话能力把他们压倒在地，就充满了愤慨。

抛开这些或好或坏的借口，为了更接近事实，口才作为个人优势的一个例子是很有吸引力的；这是一种完全的、结果性的力量，很罕见，因为它需要各种力量、智力、意志、同情心、器官，以及最重要的是事业上的好运气的共同作用。我们有一个半信半疑的想法，认为有可能出现一个能抵消所有其他人的人。我们相信，可能会有一个与事件相匹配的人，--一个从未找到他的对手的人，--其他被击垮的人被击垮的人，--一个有取之不尽的个人资源的人，他可以给你任何机会并击败你。我们真正希望的是一个能应对任何紧急情况的头脑。你在你的农村地区，或在城市里，在光天化日之下，在警察面前，在十万人的注视下，是安全的。但在大西洋上，在风暴中，情况如何呢？你知道如何将你的理智灌输给因恐怖而致残的人，并使自己安全离开吗？- 在盗贼中，或在被激怒的民众中，或在食人族中，情况如何？面对一个有各种诱惑和机会进行暴力和掠夺的强盗，你能通过你的聪明才智，通过说话使自己安全脱身吗？只要有这样的人出现，强盗就找到了主人。人与人之间在面子上的差别是多么大啊！一个人成功是因为他有更多的机会。一个人之所以成功，是因为他比另一个人有更多的眼力，所以能哄骗或迷惑他。每周的报纸都会报道一些厚颜无耻的骗子的冒险经历，他们靠着稳重的马车，骗过了那些本应更清楚的人。然而，我们所知道的任何骗子都是新手和混混，他们的恶名就证明了这一点。如果能有更大的面子，就能完成任何事情，并与他们的其他收入一起，消除恶名。如果有更大的能力，能把事情做得很好，并有十足的把握，就能把商人、银行家、法官、有影响力和权力的人、诗人和总统迷惑住，并可能领导任何政党，推翻任何君主，废除欧洲和美洲的任何宪法。有人说，一个人如果放弃了自己的道德情感，并与自己和解，不再坚持任何事情，那么他就已经一步步获得了巨大的权力。关于新英格兰的一位名人威廉-佩珀尔爵士，有人说："把他放在你可能的地方，他命令，并看到他所希望的事情实现了。" 凯撒对梅特路斯说，当那个护民官干涉阻止他进入罗马国库时，"年轻人，对我来说，把你置于死地比说我愿意更容易"；而那个年轻人屈服了。在早期，他被海盗抓走了。然后呢？他跳上他们的船；建立了最特别的亲密关系；给他们讲故事；向他们宣讲；如果他们不为他的演讲鼓掌，他就威胁他们说要吊死他们--后来他就这样做了--而且，在很短的时间内，他就成为船上所有人的主人。这是一个不能被吓倒的人，所以永远不能打出他的最后一张牌，但当他击中目标时，却有一种力量的储备。他以平静的面孔，颠覆了一个王国。关于他的事迹是神奇的；它对人的影响是如此之大。人们对他的信任是奢侈的，他改变了世界的面貌，出现了历史、诗歌和新的哲学来说明他。他是所有激情和情感的最高统帅；但他统治的秘密比这更高。它是自然的力量，毫无障碍地从大脑和意志运行到手中。男人和女人是他的游戏。他们在哪里，他就在哪里，不可能没有资源。"路德说："凡是能说好话的人，都是人"。古希腊国家曾经向斯巴达要过这样的人做将军。他们没有向拉塞德蒙要兵，而是说："给我们派个指挥官来"；而Pausaunias或Gylippus，或Brasidas，或Agis，都是由Ephors派出的。

通过这些士兵和国王的例子很容易说明这种强大的个性；但有些人有着最平和的生活方式和平和的原则，无论他们走到哪里，都能感受到他们的存在，就像七月的太阳或十二月的霜冻一样，这些人，如果他们说话，会被听到，尽管他们说得很小声，当他们行动时，他们的行动是有效的，他们所做的事情会被模仿：这些例子可以在非常卑微的平台上找到，也可以在高台上找到。

在古老的国家，对那些取得个人荣誉的人的服务有很高的金钱价值。有需要的人必须雇用的不是一个娴熟的律师，而是一个有号召力的人。据称，英国的一位大律师每年代表铁路公司向下议院委员会提出索赔要求，赚了两三万英镑。他的客户支付的不是法律费用，而是男人的成就，即勇气、行为和令人敬畏的社会地位，这使他能够使他们的要求得到倾听和尊重。

我很清楚，在我们冷静而精打细算的民族中，每个人都对自己有所警惕，在那里，激烈、恐慌和放弃都不在制度之内，人们对非凡的影响力抱有很大的怀疑态度。谈论一个强大的心灵会引起同样的嫉妒和蔑视，人们可能会看到，在一张桌子上，有人正在讲述神奇的迷魂术轶事。每位听众都会为自己的论述画上一个句号，感叹道："你能让我着迷吗？" 因此，每个人都在询问是否有演说者能改变他的信念。

但是否有人认为自己是坚不可摧的？他是否认为不可能有人来劝说他放弃他最坚定的决心--例如，他是一个好的镇静的公民，让他成为一个狂热的人？ 或者，如果他是一个贫穷的人，为了一些他现在最不愿意的目的而挥霍金钱？ 或者，如果他是一个谨慎的、勤奋的人，放弃他的工作，为一个新的兴趣付出几天和几周时间？不，他藐视任何一个人，每一个人。啊！他想的是反抗，想的是与他自己不同的转变。但是，如果有人和他有同样的想法，而且在自己的道路上比他看得更远呢？一个人如果有和我一样的品味，但却有更大的能力，那么他随时都会统治我，并让我爱上我的统治者。

因此，我们在 "口才 "这个词下主要考虑的不是语言能力，而是一种能力，这种能力一旦出现，就会使它们变得完美，而一旦缺席，就会使它们只剩下表面的价值。口才是个人最高能量的适当器官。无论是否有足够的天赋来表达，个人的优势都可能存在。它就像一座山或一颗行星一样，可以肯定地感受到；但当它有了演讲能力的武器时，它似乎首先成为真正的人，在各个方向积极工作，并为想象力提供了精美的材料。

这种情况进入了对演说家力量的每一个考虑，也是他们所有效果的关键。在集会中，你会发现演说者和听众永远处于平衡状态，而其中一方的主导地位则由话题的选择来表明。如果存在演讲的才能，但没有强烈的个性，那么就会有好的演讲者完美地接受和表达听众的意愿，而最普通的民众也会因为听到自己低下的思想被快乐的才能所补充的一切装饰所奉承。但如果演说者有个性，事情的面貌就会改变。听众被抛到了学生的位置上，像孩子一样跟着导师，听着他说的内容。就好像在马德里的国王会议上，西梅内斯敦促可以从法国获得好处，门多萨敦促可以压制佛兰德斯，而哥伦布在被介绍时，被问及他的地理知识是否可以帮助内阁，他对一方或另一方什么也没说，但他可以说明整个欧洲是如何通过将一个大如六七个欧洲的大陆并入西班牙而被削弱和减少在国王的统治之下。

演讲者和听众之间的这种平衡表现在所谓的演讲者的针对性上。在演说者和场合之间，在时间的要求和个人的偏好之间，总是存在着竞争。召开会议的紧急情况通常比辩论者心中所想的任何事情都要重要，因此对他们来说是必须的。但是，如果他们中的一个人心里有什么必要的东西，他就会很快找到发泄的机会，而且会得到大会的掌声！这种平衡在最近一次辩论中得到了体现。这种平衡在最私密的交往中也得到了体现。可怜的汤姆不知道什么时候发生的事情是如此的微不足道，以至于他可以说出他心中的想法而不会因为不合时宜的话语而被制止；但是让培根说，聪明的人宁愿听，尽管王国的革命正在进行。我听说过一个雄辩的传教士的故事，他的声音在这个城市还没有被遗忘，在死亡或悲惨的灾难的场合，会众被阴霾笼罩，他比平时更积极地登上讲台，转向他最喜欢的虔诚和欢快的感恩的课程，"让我们赞美主"，把观众、哀悼者和哀悼者带在身边，用他的颂歌和赞美之歌扫除所有私人悲伤的无礼。佩皮斯在谈到克拉伦登勋爵时说，他 "疯狂地爱上了他"，在他从一个会议上回来时，"我从来没有观察到，当一个人知道所有的人都在他下面时，他说话比在他身上要容易得多；因为，尽管他说话确实很好，但他说话的方式和自由，就好像他在玩弄它，只通知公司的所有其他人，是非常漂亮的。" 2

演说者和场合之间的这种竞争是不可避免的，而场合总是屈服于演说者的显赫地位；因为一个伟大的人是最伟大的场合。当然，听众的兴趣和演说家的兴趣是一致的。只有当他的影响力完全达到时，他们才会感到高兴；那时他们才会很高兴。特别是，他通过制造而不是接受他的主题来评估他的权力。如果他试图用人们已经知道的东西来指导他们，他就会失败；但是，通过使他们在他知道的东西上变得聪明，他每时每刻都能在集会中占据优势。拿破仑的战术是在军队的角度上行军，并始终表现出人数上的优势，这也是演说家的秘密。

演说家所运用的几种才能，以及德摩斯梯尼、埃希尼斯、德马德、自然演说家、福克斯、皮特、帕特里克-亨利、亚当斯、米拉波等人装备的华丽武器，都值得特别列举。我们不能完全省略主要作品的名字。

正如我们所看到的，演说家必须是一个实质性的人物。然后，首先，他必须有陈述的能力，--必须掌握事实，并知道如何讲述它。在任何一个就任何问题进行交谈的人中，最了解这个问题的人将获得公司的听众，如果他愿意的话，并引导谈话，--不管在场的其他人有什么天才或杰出的表现；在任何公共集会上，谁掌握了事实，能够并愿意陈述它们，人们就会听，尽管他在其他方面一无所知，尽管他声音嘶哑、不优雅，尽管他结巴和尖叫。

在法庭上，听众是不偏不倚的；他们真的希望对陈述进行筛选，并知道真相是什么。在询问证人的过程中，通常会出乎意料地跳出三四个顽固的词或短语，这些词或短语是事情的关键和命运，它们沉入所有各方的耳朵里，并坚持在那里，并决定了事情的起因。其余的都是重复和修饰；而法院和县里确实一起得出了这三四个令人难忘的表达，它们出卖了某人的思想和意义。

在每个公司里，拥有事实的人就像你雇来带领你的队伍爬山或穿越困难国家的向导。他可能在心智、教养、勇气或财产方面比不上任何一方，但他对当前的需要比他们中的任何一方都重要得多。这就是我们去法庭的目的，--陈述事实，消除一般的事实，即所有各方的真实关系；而且，在任何处理得好的事件中，真相透过所有的伪装盯着我们的脸，这是一种确定性，是众所周知的人类生活的一部分，这使聪明的观众对法庭感兴趣。

我记得，很久以前，我被律师的与众不同和案件在当地的重要性所吸引，进入法庭。囚犯的律师是英联邦最强大和最狡猾的律师。他们把州政府的律师从一个角落赶到另一个角落，把他的理由从他手下夺走，使他不得不沉默，但不是屈服。在被逼无奈的情况下，他反过来报复法官，要求法庭定义什么是抢救。法庭被逼无奈，只好试探性地说话，把能想到的一切都说了出来，以填补时间，假设案例，描述保险人、船长、领航员以及现在或将来的各种海员的职责，--就像一个被难题困扰的校长，强调读懂了上下文。但这一切都不能让墨鱼逃脱，地区检察官那条可怕的鲨鱼还在那里，狰狞地等待着他的 "法院必须定义"--可怜的法院为自己的劣势辩护。上级法院必须为此制定法律，它可怜巴巴地读着最高法院的裁决，但读给那些没有同情心的人听。法官最后不得不作出裁决，而法律界人士在定义的迷雾中拯救了他们的流氓。这些角色都是精心挑选和区分的，所以这是一场有趣的游戏。政府有足够的代表性。它是愚蠢的，但它有强烈的意愿和占有欲，并坚持到最后。法官的任务超出了他的准备，但他的立场仍然是真实的；他在那里代表一个伟大的现实，即国家的正义，我们可以很清楚地看到他的头上有一束光，而他的琐碎的谈话并没有影响，也没有阻碍，因为他完全是善意的。

然而，对事实的陈述在对法律的陈述之前就沉没了，而法律的陈述需要不可估量的高超能力，是一种最难得的天赋，在所有伟大的大师身上都是一样的东西--在律师身上，没有什么技术含量，但总是有一些常识，对普通人和书记员来说都很有趣。曼斯菲尔德勋爵的优点是常识的优点。这是我们在亚里士多德、蒙田、塞万提斯、塞缪尔-约翰逊或富兰克林身上欣赏到的相同品质。它对法律的应用似乎是很偶然的。曼斯菲尔德的每项著名判决都包含一两个有水平的句子，这些句子击中了要害。他的句子并不总是在视觉上完成的，但在思想上却是完成的。这些句子涉及到，但提出了一个坚实的命题，得出了一个真正的区别。我读到，当时的黑字律师对他的 "公平裁决 "嗤之以鼻，仿佛他们也没有学问。事实上，这就是演讲的目的，即发表声明；在我看来，所有被称为口才的东西对那些拥有口才的人来说没有什么用处，但对那些有话要说的人来说却是不可估量的。

除了对事实及其规律的了解，接下来就是方法，它构成了所有杰出人物的天才和效率。一群人来到法纽尔大厅；他们都非常了解会议的目的；他们都在同一份报纸上读到了这些事实。演说者没有掌握听众所不知道的信息；但他却教他们用他的眼睛去看事情。通过新的定位，这些情况获得了新的稳固性和价值。每一个事实都因他的命名而获得后果，琐碎的事情也变得重要，他的表达方式在人们的记忆中固定下来，并从一个月飞到另一个月。他的思想有一些新的秩序原则。在他看来，所有的东西都会飞到它们的位置上。他接下来会说什么？让这个人说话，而且只让这个人说话。通过将更高的思想风格的习惯运用到这个世界的普通事务中，他无论走到哪里都会引入美丽和壮丽。这种能力是伯克的，这种天才在我们自己的政治和法律人士身上有一些出色的例子。

想象力。在某种程度上，演说家必须是一位诗人。我们是如此富有想象力的生物，没有什么能像特例那样对人类的心灵产生影响，无论是野蛮的还是文明的。把一些日常经验浓缩成一个闪亮的符号，听众就会被电到。他们觉得自己好像已经拥有了某种新的权利和力量，可以脱离事实，并在思想上完全掌握。这对记忆来说是一种奇妙的帮助，它可以带走图像，而且永远不会失去它。像下议院、法国议院或美国国会这样的民众大会，是由这两种力量指挥的，首先是事实，然后是陈述的技巧。把论点变成一个具体的形状，变成一个形象，一些坚硬的短语，像一个球一样圆而坚实，他们可以看到、处理并带回家，事业就赢得了一半。

陈述、方法、意象、选择、坚韧的记忆力、处理事实的能力、照亮事实的能力、通过嘲笑或转移注意力而使之沉沦的能力、快速的概括、幽默、悲怆，这些都是演说家掌握的钥匙；然而这些优秀的天赋并不是口才，而且常常阻碍一个人达到口才的目的。如果我们要探究这个问题的核心，也许我们应该说，真正有口才的人是一个有能力传达其理智的人。如果你用这门艺术的非凡武器来武装这个人，让他掌握事实、学识、敏捷的想象力、讽刺、华丽的典故、无休止的说明，--所有这些天赋，如此有力和迷人，都有同样的力量来诱惑和误导观众和演说家。他的才能对他来说太多，他的马会跟着他跑；人们总是能察觉到你是否在开车，或者马是否咬着牙跑。但是，当这些才智从属于他并为他服务时，就完全不同了；我们去华盛顿，或去威斯敏斯特大厅，或者完全可以环游世界，去看一个开车的人，而不是被他跑掉的人，一个在进行伟大的设计时，对代表他的想法的呻吟有绝对的掌控，并且只用它们来表达这些；把事实，把人；在人类不可想象的轻浮中，从未从他的直立性上瞬间扭曲。对每个人来说，都有一个他最不愿意接受的真理的陈述，--一个可能的陈述，如此宽泛，如此刺耳，以至于他无法摆脱它，而必须要么屈服于它，要么死于它。否则就不会有雄辩这个词了，雄辩就是这个意思。听众无法向自己隐瞒的是，有人向他和整个世界展示了他不希望看到的东西；而且，由于他无法处置这些东西，这些东西也就处置了他。美国的公众人物和事务的历史很容易提供这种致命力量的悲剧性例子。

对于艺术的胜利，还必须有更多的要求，即从事件中加强人的力量，以便赋予理性和命运的双重力量。在超凡脱俗的雄辩中，永远有一些事务上的危机，如能使人深深地投入到他所恳求的事业中，并将所有这种广泛的力量引向一个点。对于爆炸和喷发来说，某处必须有热量的积累，在中心有被点燃的无烟煤床。在深刻的信念已经形成的情况下，雄辩的人不是漂亮的演讲者，而是内心沉醉于某种信念的人。它使他激动，使他流泪，也许几乎使他失去了表达的能力。然后，它就像短促而突然的尖叫声一样，从他身上涌出，成为意义的洪流。主体对其思想的占有是如此完整，以至于它保证了一种表达的秩序，这是自然本身的秩序，因此是最有力的秩序，是任何艺术都无法模仿的。他与其他优秀演员之间的主要区别在于，他的每一个字都传达着这样一种信念：他的思想在思考一个整体，并因思考这个整体而发怒，他说出的字和句子，无论多么令人钦佩，都是他看到的那个可怕的整体中未被考虑的部分，而他的意思是让你看到这个整体。除了这种集中力之外，还有一种令人敬畏的冷静，在所有的骚动中，它从不说出一个不成熟的音节，而是保持着它的手段和方法的秘密；演说家站在人们面前，就像一个恶魔般的力量，他们没有钥匙来了解它的奇迹。这种可怕的认真态度使猎人的古老迷信得以实现，即子弹会击中目标，而目标首先是浸在射手的血液中。

雄辩必须建立在最朴素的叙述之上。之后，它可能会自我升温，直到吐出各种类型和颜色的符号，只通过最诗意的形式说话；但是，首先和最后，它仍然必须是圣经中的事实陈述。因此，演说家是一个演说家，他的脚步永远停留在一个事实上。只有这样，他才能立于不败之地。任何天赋，任何恩惠，任何机智、学识或说明的能力都无法弥补这方面的不足。所有的听众都只是为了这一点。声音或修辞的名气会让人们听几次演讲，但他们很快就会开始问："他在做什么？"如果这个人不代表什么，他就会被抛弃。如果这个人不支持他们所相信的任何东西，一个讲事实的人，他们会长期追随；但如果演讲者本身的性格出现停顿，就会失去吸引力。传道者列举了他的人的类别，而我在其中没有找到自己的位置；那么，我怀疑没有人找到。每件事情都是我的表妹，当谎言说到事情的时候，我觉得他在触及我的一些关系，我感到不安；但当他用语言处理的时候，我们就可以不受关注了。如果你想提升我，你必须站在更高的地方。如果你想解放我，你必须是自由的。如果你要纠正我对事实的错误看法--在真正的思维秩序中向我展示同样的事实，我就不能从新的信念中退缩。

查塔姆、伯里克利和路德的力量都依赖于这种性格的力量，因为它不惧怕也不可能惧怕任何人，所以对他们的对手不屑一顾，对这些对手有时变得非常挑剔，有时变得非常可怕。

我们对这些人的轶事了解不多，也无法从那些报道他们言论的厚重书籍中得到帮助。他们中的一些人是作家，如伯克；但他们中的大多数人不是，而且没有任何与他们的名声相称的记录留下。此外，最好的东西也失去了，那就是当时的火热生活。但雄辩的条件总是存在的。它总是从著名的地方消失，而在角落里出现。只要两极相遇，只要新鲜的道德情感、自由和责任的本能与化石般的保守主义和对利益的渴求直接对立，火花就会消失。在这个国家，对奴隶制的抵制是一个富有成效的演说家的苗圃。这种自然的联系使它吸引了一连串的道德改革，以及它所提供的轻微但充分的政党组织，使城市得到了来自森林和山区的新血液的支持。野人、约翰-施洗者、隐士彼得斯、约翰-诺克斯，在商业首都的中心说出了大自然的野蛮情绪。他们每年都给我们送来一些原住民的力量，一些坚韧的橡木棍子，这些人不会被暴徒压制、侮辱或恐吓，因为他比他们更暴徒，--一个暴徒，--一些结实的乡下人，对他们来说，金钱、礼貌、硬话、鸡蛋、打击和砖头都不会有任何印象。他适合与酒吧里的聪明人和恶霸打交道；他自己也是个聪明人和恶霸，而且是更多的人；他是犁头、桩锄和锄草机的毕业生；知道沼泽和雪堤的所有秘密，对劳动、贫穷或耕作的粗暴一无所知。他的脑袋在童年时就经历了加尔文主义的操练，经历了文字和磨难，所以他站在新英格兰议会中，比任何一个新英格兰人都要纯洁，并向右和向左挥洒他的讽刺。他的口袋里不仅有文件可以回答所有的责难，证明他的所有立场，而且他的脑子里还有永恒的理性。这个人轻蔑地放弃了你们的民间组织--县、或市、或省长、或军队，是他自己的海军和炮兵、法官和陪审团、立法机关和行政机关。他已经在一所痛苦的学校里学到了他的课程。然而，如果学生有能力承受，那么可以推荐给一个有思想的人的最好的大学就是暴民的战袍。


要在这门说服的科学中培养自己的能力的人，必须把教育的重点不是放在大众艺术上，而是放在性格和洞察力上。让他看到，他的言论与行动没有区别；当他说话时，他不是什么都没做，也不是做错了，而是清理了自己的裙子，让自己参与到健康的努力中。让他把反对看成是机会。他不能被打败，也不能被打倒。在他身上有一个复活的原则，一个不朽的目标。人们的厌恶和敌意，是为了让他们的支持有价值。错的不是人们不被说服，而是他不能说服他们。他应该塑造他们，用理性和爱来武装他们，这也是他们天性的核心。他不是要中和他们的反对意见，而是要把他们变成火热的使徒和相同智慧的发布者。

雄辩的最高平台是道德情操。它就是所谓的肯定性真理，具有使听众振奋的特性；当他感到自己是在其他一切都被拿走后仍然存在的基础上讲话，并且没有时间、地点或党派的痕迹时，它传达了我们永恒的暗示。在这些情感面前，一切敌对的东西都被打倒了；最顽固的人也能感受到它们的威严。值得注意的是，一旦人们为广大群众采取行动，道德因素就会而且必须被允许，就会而且必须发挥作用；而那些最不习惯诉诸这些情感的人，在对国家讲话时，总是会想起这些情感。拿破仑甚至必须接受和使用它，因为他可以。


只有这些简单的笔触才属于最高的力量，当一只软弱的人的手逐点触及永恒的横梁和椽子时，整个自然和社会的结构都是建立在这上面的。在这翻腾的妄想之海中，我们用脚感受到了金刚不坏之身；在这偶然性的支配下，我们发现了永恒的原则。我不接受伊索克拉底的定义，即他的艺术的职责是使伟大的人变得渺小，使渺小的人变得伟大；但我认为这才是它的完美之处，即当演说家透过所有的面具看到真理的永恒尺度时，他可以在人们的眼前展示今天稳定地达到这一标准的事实，从而使伟大的人变得渺小，这是惊奇和改革人类的真正途径。

世界上所有最早的演说家都是严肃的人，依靠的是这个现实。德摩斯梯尼时代的哲学家们发现，有一种思想贯穿于他所有的演说中，即："美德能保证自己的成功"。海伦发现，"自力更生 "是德摩斯梯尼和查塔姆的论述的基调。

口才，就像其他所有的艺术一样，是建立在最精确和确定的法律之上的。它是最好的灵魂的最好的演讲。它很可能成为心灵中所有宏伟和不朽的表达者。如果它不成为一种工具，而是希望在某种程度上成为自己，并为了炫耀而炫耀，那么它就是虚假和软弱。在正确的行使中，它是一种有弹性的、未被用尽的力量，--谁发出过声音，谁估计过它--随着我们兴趣和情感的扩展而扩展。它的伟大的主人，虽然他们重视对它的实现的每一个帮助，认为任何有助于促进它的努力都不为过，而且，像阿拉伯的著名战士一样，在他的腰带上戴着17种武器，在个人战斗中偶尔使用它们，但低估了所有的手段，从不允许任何天赋，无论是声音，节奏，诗意的力量，以及对它的评价。但却低估了所有的手段，不允许任何天赋，无论是声音、节奏、诗意的力量、轶事、讽刺，都是为了炫耀，而是严肃的人，他们宁愿选择自己的正直，也不愿选择自己的天赋，并把他们为之奋斗的目标，无论是国家的繁荣，还是法律，还是改革，还是言论或出版自由，还是文字，还是道德，都看得高于整个世界，也高于自己。

Iliad, III. 192.
日记》，I. 469。