At the beginning of “Executive Overspill: Affective Bodies, Intensity, and Bush-in-Relation,” Jenny Edbauer quotes George W. Bush saying “I’ve changed my style somewhat, as you know. I’m less – I pontificate less…And I’m interacting more with people.” This quote pretty much sums up Edbauer’s whole introduction addressing how Bush hardly ever delivered a line particularly well. It baffles me though that Bush would often have this problem considering he went to Yale. Did Bush do well at Yale? Does he think before he speaks? These questions would always come to my mind when I would hear him speak. I couldn’t figure it out.
Edbauer not only discussed Bush’s public speaking but also Reagan’s. After I finished reading the article, I realized I could probably connect more with the reading if I experienced Reagan’s public speaking for myself. I have included a video of one of Reagan’s speeches below. After viewing a few of Reagan’s speeches, I couldn’t make out any body language that “was so jerky and unsmooth.” I also thought for the most part Reagan followed “a logical line to its conclusion.” Maybe Edbauer could have used a better example to demonstrate her main points throughout the article?
I watched the Reagan video you posted, and I too couldn’t make out any strange, jerky mannerisms in speech or nonverbal movements. But I remember Professor Davis saying something about people with disabilities (one group could only interpret the nonverbal; the other group could only interpret the verbal) couldn’t understand Reagan. Perhaps to the untrained eye (you and me) he seems normal, but under close scientific scrutiny, his speech is filled with oddities and strange mannerisms.
ReplyDeleteNo jerky movements but certainly some unique pacing. Reagan tends to squish sentences together that normally wouldn't be squished together. For instance, he says, "Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy accommodation." The gap between "victory" and "They" is a short one, where most speakers would make it longer. This gives Reagan's speech an element of surprise-- an element I think might have been a reason why he was viewed as such an effective communicator
ReplyDelete