Critical Error 11 Drawing Words from the Wrong Well
Toward the end of World War II, Niels Bohr set up a meeting with Winston Churchill to warn him about an atomic arms race that Bohr correctly predicted would occur after the war. Bohr wanted all countries to establish guidelines to contain these weapons. A
- PDF / 203,891 Bytes
- 13 Pages / 439.37 x 666.14 pts Page_size
- 88 Downloads / 204 Views
It is hard to overestimate the dismay and resentment of an audience that has to put up with a paper read hurriedly in an even monotone.1 –P. B. Medawar
Toward the end of World War II, Niels Bohr set up a meeting with Winston Churchill to warn him about an atomic arms race that Bohr correctly predicted would occur after the war. Bohr wanted all countries to establish guidelines to contain these weapons. A few months earlier, Churchill had diminished hopes for such guidelines by signing away British rights to nuclear development. Because Bohr, who had recently fled Denmark, did not speak English very well, he decided to write out the presentation in his best English and have a friend, R.V. Jones, go over the draft and polish the language. For three days, the two men worked on this presentation, and when Bohr was pleased with the product, he memorized it. The day of the meeting arrived, and Bohr was brought to Churchill by an aide who was sympathetic to Bohr’s position. Unfortunately, as soon as Bohr and the aide met Churchill, Churchill put both the aide and Bohr on the defensive by claiming that the meeting was nothing more than a reproach for England’s signing away of the rights to nuclear development. Bohr tried to improvise, but according to R.V. Jones, “no doubt suffered from his usual anxiety to be precise.”2 Within 20 minutes, Churchill lost patience and had Bohr ushered out of the office. How should scientists and engineers deliver their words in a scientific presentation? Should they read those words or should they memorize them? Another possibility would be that
229
230
THE CRAFT OF SCIENTIFIC PRESENTATIONS
scientists and engineers speak extemporaneously—that is, the speaker commits to memory the organization of the talk, but not the exact wording. In an extemporaneous talk, the speaker practices the talk several times to be sure that he or she can fashion the words on the spot. Still another possibility is that scientists and engineers speak impromptu, which is often referred to as speaking off the cuff. Before deciding upon an answer, you should consider the advantages and disadvantages of each approach, as listed in Table 5-1. What might surprise you is that occasions arise, as shown in Table 5-2, in which each approach is appropriate.
Table 5-1. Advantages and disadvantages of different sources for speech. Sources
Advantages
Disadvantages
Extemporaneous
Credibility earned
Wording not exact
Easy to adjust speech
Much preparation
Eye contact
Natural pace
No preparation time
Potential for disaster
Eye contact
Difficulty in organizing
Impromptu
Lack of visual aids Memorizing
Reading
Precision
Potential for disaster
Smooth delivery
Unnatural pace
Credibility earned
Inability to adjust speech
Eye contact
Most preparation
Precision
Unnatural pace
Smooth delivery
Lack of eye contact Inability to adjust speech Significant preparation Lack of credibility
Delivery: You, the Room, and the Audience
231
Table 5-2. Appropriate occasions for each source of speech. Sources
Situati
Data Loading...
