אורנים דוט קום – מגזין האינטרנט של מכללת אורנים

by: Yair Harris

After a short opening speech about the origins and contemporary forms of formal public discourse by the Dean of Humanities, Dr. Jack Pastor, the conference kicked off with an insightful lecture about principles of rhetoric and the art of debating. The speaker, Michael Shapira, did a marvelous job of proving how fluent and articulate a non-native speaker of English like himself can be, and of explaining the complex and abstract qualities that charismatic speakers possess.

Next up were Dr. Nancy Peled and Prof. Danielle Schaub. They read texts to the audience, which in turn was required to assess their manner of reading, and later to recognize rhetoric devices within these texts. Peled, who in her first reading put on a wonderful performance, assuming the role of an incompetent and neurotic reader, at once sent the audience into fits of laughter and urged it to consider the many vital ingredients involved in presentation that can go amiss and make it utterly illegible.

Anat Shapira, also a non-native speaker of English, winner of several international debate competitions, talked about her experience in the Debating Society – a debating club that she identifies as the primary contributor to her current level of English. Her command of the English language is truly an inspiration for non-native speakers. She advocated the integration of debating into school curricula and explained why learning to debate can boost rhetorical, cognitive and social skills.

Last on the conference was a live debate about whether or not attendance should be mandatory for courses in Oranim. It was debated by four guest students from Ben Gurion University, Haifa University and the Technion. They argued vehemently and confidently, providing further proof as to the benefits that learning to debate and practicing it on a regular basis offer speakers.

The only slightly critical question I would like to raise is should speakers not try to appear as genuine and honest as they can? Is it not a bad thing if a speaker is noticeably trained to use certain gestures and intonations at specific moments? If a speech is delivered articulately and lucidly, yet feels as if spoken by a salesman that is aggressively trying to sell you something, will the audience buy it or be put off? Finally, what concerns me most is whether training to become flamboyant debaters causes us to lose our candor and character. Perhaps too much instruction on how to perform in front of people can rob you of your own authentic style and turn you into an artificial debating robot.

Overall, the conference was an enriching and enjoyable experience. The presenters managed to keep the atmosphere light and lively despite the complexity, subtleties and nuances of the subject of rhetoric. I was left with an urge to debate anything with anyone and to practice my spoken English.