The Best?

In a political campaign, we are subjected to a lot of speeches and debates from candidates- perhaps slightly more than during a non-election year. It would seem reasonable to assume that candidates for elective office would be among the more accomplished speakers and communicators. Even if you thought that was not automatically true, particularly with your lower offices such as the state legislature, you would probably think it was true for presidential candidates, who have either won a whole string of elections or succeeded in some other arena where speaking is key.

It's not true, lamentably. This aggravates me tremendously. I have been in Toastmasters for several years now, and while I don't claim to be the champion speaker of the world, I will say I have improved a good amount, and I see that in speakers around me as well. People start out terrified to speak, and they not only lose that fear, they become competent and even excellent given time and dedication. Even in their first tentative steps, however, new members of Toastmasters are way ahead of our president and his rival in some respects.

Unconvincing

I went and saw the movie "John Carter" with a couple of friends. I meant to go in with an open mind and low expectations in spite of having something of an affection for the couple of books I read from the series on which the movie is based. I think I managed that, but maybe I didn't, considering that I wound up with mixed feelings about the movie. It was a big, loud spectacle, and God knows I like that. It was also a mess of a story, which I don't go for.

I expressed my feelings on the overly long, complicated story we had just seen, and was surprised to find myself not just the lone voice of dissent but someone who may as well have been speaking a foreign language. Try as I might, I could not manage to adequately convey my feelings about the film's shortcomings. I assume that I failed in communication, because I can't imagine that I'm wrong (as the movie is projected to lose a considerable amount of money).

"...And Keep In Touch."

These days, I am far more social than I used to be. When I get the idea that I have eradicated old tendencies towards isolation though, I tend to be corrected. It's all still there, and maybe all that's changed is that I am now open to being wrenched away from them by external forces. If I were in an unfamiliar town with no one I knew, I probably would just stay in the hotel room. With a friend, I might even take the lead on going out and doing things, but only because they were there.

I've never fooled myself into thinking I have become comfortable talking on the phone. Before everyone else had abandoned phone calls in favor of texting and online things, I was very ill at ease. The pressing of the last digit to someone's number felt like cutting the crucial wire on a bomb, with al the attendant anxiety. Phone conversations are hard, because there is no forgiveness for pauses. In person you're still communicating when you're not talking. On the phone, you might as well not be there if you're not talking.

Get The Message

When I was younger we still had the answering machine with a cassette tape to record messages. I did not find it difficult to use, and I suppose no one else did either. At least, I should say, they managed to use it. What alternative was there? If you didn't leave a message, how was anyone to know that you had called? Later caller ID made a record of who called regardless of whether they had left a message, but you were depending on them to have a listed number. If they didn't, they made sure to leave a message.

The cassette machines were supplanted by ones with digital recording, and those were in turn replaced by voicemail. With each innovation, people have gotten less likely to leave an actual message. The result is that it works the way beepers used to. Somebody calls, you see that they called and you call them back, utterly ignorant of what they want. I'll tell you, I really don't care for that. I make a point of leaving a message.

B As In Boy

I've always said that verbal communication ranks higher than text-based in terms of the information conveyed. On the whole, I think that's true, but there is one area where text is indisputably superior to any other means. When you need to relate a name, an address, a number or any other thing where every single little syllable must get through perfectly, you can't beat a text or email. Of course, it remains possible for there to be a typo. One must be vigilant, as in all things.

I was just thinking about the particular brand of verification that we all relied on and which still is employed in situations where one really cannot transmit a text (a good example of which would be when one has to call a government office. I am certain that the technology will reach them in some twenty years). What your typical person will do is offer a word which begins with the letter in question, and it must be a word which cannot possibly be confused with any other. "It's Boyle Street. B as in boy, O as in Oprah..."