Memorizing the Speech
The second method—of repeating memorized compositions—is better. It at least seems alive. It has an appearance of direct address. It possesses the other advantages of the first method—definite reasoning and careful construction. But its dangers are grave.
Few people can recite memorized passages with the personal appeal and direct significance that effective spoken discourse should have. Emphasis is lacking. Variety is absent. The tone becomes monotonous. The speech is so well committed that it flows too easily. If several speakers follow various methods, almost any listener can unerringly pick the memorized efforts.
Let the speaker in delivery strive for variety, pauses, emphasis; let him be actor enough to simulate the feeling of spontaneous composition as he talks, yet no matter how successful he may be in his attempts there will still be slight inconsistencies, trifling incongruities, which will disturb a listener even if he cannot describe his mental reaction. The secret lies in the fact that written and spoken composition differ in certain details which are present in each form in spite of the utmost care to weed them out.