The Bailey Oratorical: A Lesson in Presentation and Perspective
When I first heard this year’s prompt for the Bailey Oratorical, I instantly wondered how anyone could come up with a singular person. The decision of who should be Person of the Year is already a complex one, but that question gets even more complicated when you consider how much has happened in the past year.
Turns out the answer is very simple: discuss no one (or nothing) people expected. The seven finalists approached the prompt from a place of concepts rather than grandiose actions by individuals that were incredibly well-known and comprehensively reported on. Often when we think of this honor, I think we automatically connect it to individuals who “changed the world” in some way, but usually that way is massive strides in a seemingly short period of time or of monetary significance. However, this year’s Bailey finalists countered the constructed idea of the types of people who receive the award. They argued for the award to go to therapists, misinformation and disinformation, and even for the end of the honor.
While I learned a lot through their speeches, one thing that I really learned was how far outside the box one can think. Up until the moment the Bailey began I was still wondering who I might have spoken about if I had decided to participate. And over the course of the night, I realized that it truly could have been anyone or anything. We’ve been taught to focus on every detail on a prompt to specifics in school, and I thought the same would go for this. But it didn’t and I’m really glad it didn’t, because I feel a lot more creative after it, which is not a result I was expecting.
If you asked me to pick a favorite or most impactful speech from the night, I don’t think I could. All of the finalists discussed incredibly important topics related to politics, social change, and even COVID-19, and each was impactful in their own way. Their speeches were all convincing, and I guess I agree with Kayla that the honor shouldn’t exist, and that competition shouldn’t either. Putting those sorts of issues and topics in the realm of a competition and then having to choose which were more convincing feels a bit insensitive and uncomfortable. All the topics discussed were important, and by essentially “ranking” them, the competition itself unintentionally diminishes a topic’s value.
I also learned a lot about public speaking and the sort of “self” you create when presenting something. I always assumed that there was always a specific tone that people used when orating, but this year’s Bailey finalists presented their speeches in a variety of tones. Some were serious, some had a more humorous tone. It really changed my perspective on how someone can present information and be persuasive. I also learned about how the tone you use when speaking affects how effectively engage with your audience.
What I learned about presenting will definitely be useful in planning and preparing for my final project in this class. I don’t have much experience with public speaking and presentations have never been my strong suit, so realizing what I have has already changed how I’m thinking about the assignment. At first I was hesitant to use a story as a jumping off point, but now that I’ve seen some more examples of that being used, it seems like a more accomplishable feat, and I’m excited to see how it all pans out.
I learned a lot from the Bailey Oratorical due to the topics of the speeches, but I also learned a lot in regard to approaching prompts in a more creative way, how we think about competition, and how to present a topic. I did not expect to learn something other than what the finalists were talking about, but I’m very grateful I did.
