Aristotle said that ceremonial speeches are about honor. All good ceremonial speakers take time to express some issue broader than the immediate honor. The American songwriter Bob Dylan accepted the Nobel Prize for Literature on December 10, 2016. Declining to attend the ceremony in person was quite in character for him. Since he wasn't there, he sent a speech, which United States Ambassador Azita Raji read. Dylan's speech talked about the honor, and drew a larger point.
This seemed a bid odd, but historians for rhetoric know that there is precedent for speeches that the speaker doesn't present. For example, in ancient Greece, Gorgias' praise of Helen was written as a sample to study, not for oral presentation. It has been said that Gandhi was sometimes too nervous to read a speech, and had someone else read it for him. I do recommend showing up in person to give your own speeches, but, well, I'm not Bob Dylan.
The speech itself? Dylan expressed a proper degree of modesty: he said he was "honored to be receiving such a prestigious prize" and said that he "never could have imagined or seen coming." He repeated the names of earlier prize winners, whose work he had read and admired, including "Kipling, Shaw, Thomas Mann, Pearl Buck, Albert Camus, Hemingway."
Concluding, Dylan said that "Not once have I ever had the time to ask myself, 'Are my songs literature?'" That is the larger point. Are songs literature? Certainly! Good ones, anyway. Again, many of the great poets of the past were songwriters. The immortal Sappho was a songwriter. Of course, thousands of years later, no one really knows what tunes she sang, but her song lyrics remain icons of poetic beauty. Indian songwriter Rabindranath Tagore won the 1913 Nobel Prize for Literature.
A good ceremonial speech is never fluff. It should always be interesting, and can even cause controversy. Congratulations, Bob Dylan, and thank you for the songs.
No comments:
Post a Comment