You don't need to speak Arabic to tell that Mubarak isn't much of an orator

I'm grateful to Martin Shovel for asking me via Twitter (@MartinShovel) earlier today: 'Where's your much anticipated rhetorical analysis of Mubarak's latest speech?'

The short answer is that there are some things for which I lack the time or inclination (or both).

But Martin's question did take me back to something I blogged about last July, when Fidel Castro had just given his first TV interview since his 'retirement' (HERE). That had reminded me of a rather obvious point I'd made in a heading above a picture of the young Castro in my book Our Masters' Voices (1984, p.4):

'Skillful public speaking can be readily recognized even in those whose politics we may disagree with, and whose languages we do not understand.'

What fascinated me then - and still does - is the fact that we don't have to be able to understand Spanish or German to be able to recognise that Castro and Hitler were highly effective orators.

The opposite is also the case: you don't have to be able to understand Arabic to be able to tell at a glance that Egyptian President Mubarak is a long way from the Premier League when it comes to public speaking - and non-Arabic speakers can check this out by watching him in action above.

The rise of the ineffective orator

Much the same can be said of other second and third generation revolutionary leaders. Compared with Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki was a bit short in the communication skills department. So too were Stalin, Khruschev and Brezhnev in comparison with Lenin (and I don't speak Russian, either).

The point is that, once a new order is established, behind the scenes committee work, plotting, befriending the right people, bumping off or otherwise disposing of rivals, winning support of the right factions and organisations , etc. become far more important than being able to appeal to a mass audience of people whose votes will determine your rise or fall.

Nor, if you can get to the top job - like so many leaders of Arab nations outside Egypt - by being the favoured relation of the previous head of a ruling family, do you have to worry about anything so tiresome as being able to move, persuade and inspire mass audiences.

Although I've no idea how effective an orator President Nasser, the first leader of the new Egypt, was, I'll bet he was a good deal better at it than his ousted predecessor (King Farouk).

Aprés Mubarak?

It now looks as though Hosni Mubarak's plan to take a leaf out of the Assad family book in Syria - by handing over to his son - is about to be thwarted. So, if Gamil Mubarak is still hoping to see his father's dream come true, he may well be in the market for some professional coaching.

Martin Shovel - and other likely UK suppliers of such services - may like to note that, according to The Sun, Gamil and his family have already decamped to his modest little £8.5 million pad in Knightsbridge. For his phone number and other contact details, I'm sure that the Murdoch family and/or News International will be able to oblige...

More 3-part lists and a touch of management speak from Obama on Egypt

From his five minute speech yesterday, it was yet another three-part list was singled out from President Obama's statement about Egypt to become the most widely quoted line in the news headlines:

"An orderly transition must be meaningful, it must be peaceful and it must begin now."

I say 'yet another' because I've commented before on Obama's frequent use of three-part lists, of which there were 29 in his ten minute victory speech in Chicago.

And yesterday's headline was only one of six such lists in his five-minute statement, the others being:

1. "Over the past few days, the American people have watched the situation unfolding in Egypt.
2. "We’ve seen enormous demonstrations by the Egyptian people.
3. "We’ve borne witness to the beginning of a new chapter in the history of a great country, and a long-time partner of the United States."

"And throughout this period, we’ve stood for a set of core principles.

1. "First, we oppose violence ...
2. "Second, we stand for universal values ...
3. "Third, we have spoken out on behalf of the need for change ... "

1. "Furthermore, the process must include a broad spectrum of Egyptian voices and opposition parties.
2. "It should lead to elections that are free and fair.
3. "And it should result in a government that’s not only grounded in democratic principles, but is also responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people."

"I want to be clear:

1. "We hear your voices.
2. "I have an unyielding belief that you will determine your own destiny and seize the promise of a better future for your children and your grandchildren.
3. "And I say that as someone who is committed to a partnership between the United States and Egypt."

1. "That truth can be seen in the sense of community in the streets.
2. "It can be seen in the mothers and fathers embracing soldiers.
3. "And it can be seen in the Egyptians who linked arms to protect the national museum."

Management-speak?

However smooth the rhetoric written into this hastily prepared statement (produced, as it was, very soon after Mubarak's speech in Cairo) might have been, I was surprised to hear the inclusion of a participle that's been featuring more and more in management presentations over the past few years, namely the use of 'going forward' when speakers are talking about the future:

"And going forward, I urge the military to continue its efforts to help ensure that this time of change is peaceful."

"And going forward, the United States will continue to stand up for democracy and the universal rights that all human beings deserve, in Egypt and around the world."

Personally, I find it almost as irritating and distracting as the growing preference for using 'ahead of' when the speaker or writer (journalists being the worst offenders) actually means 'before' (HERE) - and I recommend people on my courses to avoid using either of them.

Unless President Obama really does want to sound like an MBA graduate who's just swallowed a dictionary of management jargon, I think it's time he had a word with his speechwriters. And, while he's at it, he might like to remind them that one 'furthermore' in a speech is one too many.

Full script of President Obama's statement on Egypt

Good evening, everybody. Over the past few days, the American people have watched the situation unfolding in Egypt. We’ve seen enormous demonstrations by the Egyptian people. We’ve borne witness to the beginning of a new chapter in the history of a great country, and a long-time partner of the United States.

And my administration has been in close contact with our Egyptian counterparts and a broad range of the Egyptian people, as well as others across the region and across the globe. And throughout this period, we’ve stood for a set of core principles.

First, we oppose violence. And I want to commend the Egyptian military for the professionalism and patriotism that it has shown thus far in allowing peaceful protests while protecting the Egyptian people. We’ve seen tanks covered with banners, and soldiers and protesters embracing in the streets. And going forward, I urge the military to continue its efforts to help ensure that this time of change is peaceful.

Second, we stand for universal values, including the rights of the Egyptian people to freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, and the freedom to access information. Once more, we’ve seen the incredible potential for technology to empower citizens and the dignity of those who stand up for a better future. And going forward, the United States will continue to stand up for democracy and the universal rights that all human beings deserve, in Egypt and around the world.

Third, we have spoken out on behalf of the need for change. After his speech tonight, I spoke directly to President Mubarak. He recognizes that the status quo is not sustainable and that a change must take place. Indeed, all of us who are privileged to serve in positions of political power do so at the will of our people. Through thousands of years, Egypt has known many moments of transformation. The voices of the Egyptian people tell us that this is one of those moments; this is one of those times.

Now, it is not the role of any other country to determine Egypt’s leaders. Only the Egyptian people can do that. What is clear — and what I indicated tonight to President Mubarak — is my belief that an orderly transition must be meaningful, it must be peaceful, and it must begin now.

Furthermore, the process must include a broad spectrum of Egyptian voices and opposition parties. It should lead to elections that are free and fair. And it should result in a government that’s not only grounded in democratic principles, but is also responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people.

Throughout this process, the United States will continue to extend the hand of partnership and friendship to Egypt. And we stand ready to provide any assistance that is necessary to help the Egyptian people as they manage the aftermath of these protests.

Over the last few days, the passion and the dignity that has been demonstrated by the people of Egypt has been an inspiration to people around the world, including here in the United States, and to all those who believe in the inevitability of human freedom.

To the people of Egypt, particularly the young people of Egypt, I want to be clear: We hear your voices. I have an unyielding belief that you will determine your own destiny and seize the promise of a better future for your children and your grandchildren. And I say that as someone who is committed to a partnership between the United States and Egypt.

There will be difficult days ahead. Many questions about Egypt’s future remain unanswered. But I am confident that the people of Egypt will find those answers. That truth can be seen in the sense of community in the streets. It can be seen in the mothers and fathers embracing soldiers. And it can be seen in the Egyptians who linked arms to protect the national museum — a new generation protecting the treasures of antiquity; a human chain connecting a great and ancient civilization to the promise of a new day.

Thank you very much.

Always look on the bright side: the Northern Lights, a cruise and a conversation

I mentioned in the previous post that we were hoping to catch a glimpse of the Northern Lights from a return boat trip from Tromso to Kirkeness, a few miles from Norway's northern border with Russia.

And 'glimpse', alas, turned out to be exactly what it was. Yes, we did see them, but not in the glorious technicolor to be seen on DVDs and from picture searches on Google. What we did see on a couple of nights were more like strangely-shaped moonlit clouds - good to have seen them, but hardly up to the sales blurb that had tempted us so far north in the middle of winter.

So here are a couple of handy tips for any readers who might be planning a similar trip

TIP 1: Find a more comfortable way of seeing them

The trouble with inspecting the Northern Lights from a boat is that, however warm and comfortable it may be, you have to go out on deck whenever they appear. Apart from the rush of passengers, many of whom were quite old and frail, the icy surface under foot made it quite a challenge just to remain vertical. Then, once you'd found a gap on the rail to hang on to, the freezing wind meant that you could only manage a few minutes of sky-gazing before the threat of hypothermia drove you inside again.

Another hazard, as unexpected as it was hilarious, was came from an idiot who came dashing out with a torch asking "where are they?" By the time he'd finished flashing his light into our eyes, none of us could see well enough to tell him where to look.

All of which suggests to me that a much more comfortable way of seeing the Northern Lights would be from a suitably located luxury hotel equipped with a heated greenhouse or conservatory, amply furnished with comfortable beds and/or sofas.

TIP 2: Beware of cruises that tell you where to sit

I've blogged before about people who routinely break the most basic rules of conversation (e.g. HERE). On the first night of the trip, we were allocated to a table at which, it turned out, the organisers were intending that we should sit for dinner on all four nights of the cruise.

It was a table for 4 people and, though I didn't have a stop-watch on me, I can report that the time spent speaking by each of us around the said table was not far off the following:

Speaker A: 94%

Speaker B: 3%

Speaker C: 2%

Speaker D: 1 %

After the first ten minutes, we'd had a full run-down of A's allergies and ailments, past and present. By the end of the meal, we knew how many times she'd been married, how many children and grandchildren she had, together with related face-sheet data on each of them (names, ages, occupations, where they lived + some of their medical histories too), why she and her current husband (Speaker D) lived where they lived, where it is in relation to the Tesco roundabout on the by-pass, which junction it was nearest to on the M1, what kind of house they live in, how much it had cost to buy compared with the one they'd sold, how much work had been needed to do it up (+ detailed costs of different home improvement projects), how she'd bought it while D was in hospital suffering from (cue more details about illnesses), which excursions they were planning to go on over the next few days (plus detailed explanations of why they'd selected some and not others), where the money to pay for holidays like this had come from (i.e. a late parent's estate, complete with details of how her share of it compared with that received by her siblings, about each of whom yet more details about etc., etc., etc.

During this unstoppable torrent, the only thing we managed to divulge about ourselves was that we live in Somerset (thankfully, a safe distance away from any junction on the M1).

I went straight from the table to the desk of the tour operator's representative, who confirmed that we were indeed going to have to sit through three more meals with Speaker A - and that no, this would not qualify us to get any of our money back. Nor was he able to provide any explanation or reason why the company saw fit to condemn its customers to such a miserable fate.

Luckily, he did have one useful tip: there were two separate sittings for dinner and it might be possible to arrange with the restaurant manager for us to escape to the other one - which I did and we did.

Needless to say, I shall be raising this matter if and when the company's customer-satisfaction questionnaire ever reaches me.

Looking on the bright side

In the meantime, the sheer awfulness of having to put up with this relentless violation of the most basic rules of turn-taking has spurred me on (yet again) to start planning the book about conversation that I've been threatening to write for at least 25 years. For that, at least, I am grateful to Speaker A, whose blistering performance may even provide the basis for a chapter (or two).