tion, a misfortune which the Roman orator had to undergo, in consequence, partly, of the necessity of holding up on his left arm the burden of his unweildy toga, while engaged in speaking, and, partly, from the analogy of such a position to the manly attitude of the ancient soldier, with his left foot advanced, in inevitable correspondence to the act of protecting his body by advancing his left arm, on which the shield was worn. The use of such an attitude, in modern oratory, throws over the speaker's whole mien the air of an artisan at the anvil, whose object it is to bring down a blow from the greatest practicable height and distance. The custom of some of our academic institutions prescribes to the student the habit of standing with both feet flat on the floor, and without the aid to easy and graceful attitude which comes from the slight raising of the heel of the retired foot, when the weight of the body is supported on the advanced one. The consequences of this error, slight as it may seem, are the raising of one shoulder, and the stiffening of the whole attitude of the body, one of the most prominent and glaring faults with which our New England students are generally chargea ble, in the act of declaiming. Another very common error in the attitude of New England speakers, and one which is, in some instances, enjoined by erroneous instruction, is the habit of standing in the square attitude of the Indian, or of the English ploughman, with the feet pointing directly forward from the body. An inevitable consequence of this error, is, that whenever the speaker advances, in the animation of energetic address, his false line of position in the foot, swings round his shoulder to his audience, so that he has then the attitude, precisely, of a fencer in attack. Another bad result of this fault in position and movement, is, that it inclines the speaker to the habit of frequently turning his side to the body of his audience, and addressing now one portion, on the right, then another, on the left, to the' exclusion of the majority.* --- The slight attention necessary to point the toes outward, enables the speaker, by the easy and natural turn of the head, to address his whole audience, and keep them constantly in his eye, and by the law of natural sympathy, to secure their uninterrupted attention, by directing his eye to theirs, not at intervals, but continually; not now to one part of the congregation, and then to another; but to all successively: the speaker's attention being due to the whole assembly equally. This indispensable condition of appropriate address, is necessarily dependent on the position of the foot; as on it the whole attitude of the body is founded. The mode of changing the bodily attitude, is another of those points of practical oratory, which need much attention from the student. The bad effects of neglected habit, are very generally apparent in this particular. One speaker shifts his position with a bold stride; another, with a timid and shuffling slide; one slips or glides to one side, when he ought to advance; another points his foot directly forward, which throws him into the shouldering attitude already described; some stand as motionless as statues, through a whole address; others are perpetually shifting their place without cause; and others, again, make every change of posture a formal and laborious operation. Changes of attitude ought to be made either for the * Austin, in his elaborate and eloquent work, Chironomia, quotes, in this connection, the following apposite description of an awkward speaker, as given from personal observation, by Cresollius, in his treatise on oratory. "When he turned himself to the left, he spoke a few words accompanied by a moderate gesture of the hand; then, bending to the right, he acted the same part over again; then, back again to the left, and presently to the right, almost at an equal and measured interval of time, he worked himself up to his usual gesture, and his one kind of movement: you could compare him only to the blindfolded Babylonian ox going forward and returning back by the same path." effect of quietness and repose, as a natural relief, at the end of a bold passage of earnest address, or for force of emphasis in an energetic assertion or a warm appeal. The former is properly a quiet retiring movement, made at the close of a paragraph or head of discourse, or at the beginning of such a portion of an address, when the language is less intense than in the strain immediately preceding it: the latter is a spirited advance, made during the act of speaking, and in strict time with the emphasis of the voice and the gesture of the arm. In either case, the movement is not obtrusive but is merged in the general effect. The frequency of change in attitude should always be left dependent on the comparative quietness or animation of the composition to which the speaker is giving utterance: the former style requires few, the latter may require many changes; - the former, retiring; the latter, advancing movements. THE CHARACTER OF ORATORICAL ACTION. The prevalent neglect of speaking, as an art, causes many great errors of habit in early life, which continue unremoved in subsequent stages. Among these, the mode of using the hand is conspicuous. The analogy on which the hand is used in oratory, is that of imparting, giving, or bestowing; as speaking is the audible and visi ble impartation or communication of sentiment. The analogy, in detail, is that of delivering an object, — as, for example, a ball, into the hand of another. Such an act requires an open and sloping position of the hand, and a slight parting of the two outer fingers from the two middle ones, as the necessary condition of giving. The suggestion hence arising to the student, is that every position of the hand which holds it crooked, or level, or flat, or inclined upward, or which keeps the fingers confined, is inappropriate, because inconsistent with giving, imparting, or communicating. The recipient holds out a hollow hand, with crooked, or bent fingers: the giver opens and slopes his hand, and partially separates the outer fingers from the others, as mentioned. The speaker who appeals to our feelings, expands his hand, as the natural expression of appeal or of entreaty, in the spirit of free and persuasive communication. Yet how often we see the hand of the speaker held out flat and close, like a piece of board, or edgewise, like a chopping knife, or feebly hollowed, like that of a beggar, receiving alms. Sometimes, on the contrary, we see it clinched in a style which calls up the associations of "strife and debate," and "smiting with the fist of wickedness." The palm, (the seat of the great expansion of the sympathetic nerve,) has in it a most eloquent natural language. It is to the hand what the countenance is to the head, the seat of expression. The free opening, then, of the hand, is one of the primary conditions of visible eloquence.* The use of the arm, in oratorical action, is another practical point of great moment to the right effect of address. The confined and angular movements of the arm, which take place in the natural and appropriate gestures * Manus vero, sine, quibus trunca esset actio ac debilis, vix dici potest, quot motus habeant, cum pene ipsam verborum copiam persequantur. Nam cæteræ partes loquentem adjuvant, hæ, (prope est ut dicam,) ipsæ loquuntur. An non his poscimus? pollicemur? vocamus ? dimittimus ? minamur? supplicamus ? abominamur? timemus ? interrogamus ? negamus? gaudium, tristitiam, dubitationem, confessionem, pœnitentiam, modum, copiam, numerum, tempus, ostendimus? Non eædem concitant? supplicant? inhibent? probant? admirantur? verecundantur? non in demonstrandis locis atque personis adverbiorum atque pronominum obtinent vicem? ut in tanta per omnes gentes nationesque linguæ diversitate hic mihi omnium hominum communis sermo videatur.— Quintil. l. xi. c. 3. The value attached, by the ancients, to the eloquence of the hand, as an instrument of expression, is unequivocally intimated in the fact that the whole art of elocution was comprehended under the term Xeporofizia. of the parlor or the study, when the persons who are addressed are seated near to the speaker, are utterly inapplicable to the act of addressing a public assembly, in which the speaker's action is to be directed, (if rightly performed,) to the remotest not less than the nearest of his audience. The larger space, in the latter instance, demands larger scope for the arm in action, as certainly as it demands the full tone of voice used in public speaking, and not the comparatively slight utterance used by the fireside. The style of gesture, then, in public address, requires a free action of the arm, terminating, usually, in its full extension, in whatever line a sentiment prompts, avoiding, however, such a degree of extension as terminates in a rigidly straight line, which is always an offence to the eye, as associated with a stiff or mechanical style of action. A prevalent fault of gesture, in the pulpit, is that of allowing it to fall habitually in a line drawn from the speaker's side. This style of action might be applicable, were all his audience placed in one long row at his right hand. But as they are actually seated in front of him, his hand, if its action is to have any meaning, - should be presented in front, and obliquely from his own body. A horizontal sweep or swing of the arm, is the habitual gesture of some pulpit orators. But this style belongs only to descriptive effect, or to that of negation or removal, while assertion, the prevalent mood of speaking, - demands a downward movement of the arm, more or less direct according to the form of a sentiment. The horizontal line of action is that which properly terminates the expression of general ideas, as coïncident in character with the expansive horizontal sweep of the eye, in an extensive view; for the phenomena of gesture are analogous, in their influence on imagination, to the effect of ocular action on external objects, and on visible motion: hence the energetic character of the decent of the arm, in a strong assertion, the expansive effect of a wide horizon |
