The Spike: or, Victoria University College Review, October 1917
The Plunket Medal Contest
The Plunket Medal Contest
"Oratores, oratrices, audias perfundere voces dignas Cicerone."—Brown.
The eleventh annual contest for the Plunket Medal was held in the College Gymnasium on Saturday, September 15th. The large audience was in itself a sufficient justification for the decision of the Debating Society Committee to hold the contest, in spite of the opinion of some students that the contest should be abandoned during war time. It was suggested, too, by some, that with so many men students at the front the standard of speaking would necessarily be lowered. We think, however, that this year's standard was not only very much higher than last year's, but even compared favourably with the standard reached in the best of these contests which were held before the war.
Mr. W. E. Leicester, in his speech on Cortes, gave every evidence of a through appreciation of his subject, and the language was well chosen. Had the speech been delivered much more slowly, Mr. Leicester should have secured a very high place.
Mr. H. G. Miller, who spoke of John Bright, was somewhat monotonous. His manner of speaking was too quiet for oratory, in the generally accepted meaning of that term. The judges of the contest, however, seemed to prefer a quiet style of speaking
Mr. F. Robertson chose Tolstoi as his hero. Before Mr. Robertson can hope to become an orator, he will have to learn to take his subject and his audience a little more seriously, and to adopt a less truculent manner.
Mr. I. Sutherland, who spoke of John Wesley, made the mistake of devoting too much time to the introduction of his speech. In language and delivery he was clear and forcible. He has undoubtedly the personality and the voice for pulpit oratory. With more experience, he will learn to vary his voice, which on this occasion, was too even in tone, and now and again inclined to be nasal.
Mr. G. H. Winder spoke of Julius Caesar. There was real merit in his speech. He succeeded in holding the attention of his audience, and in presenting Julius Caesar's character in a manner which did not savour of the history book. Mr. Winder, in common with almost all the speakers, made too little variation in the tones of his voice.
Mr. C. G. Kirk made a happy choice when he decided to speak on General Gordon. His speech, had it been more even, would have been the best of the evening. In literary merit it surpassed any of the others. In gesture, in mode of expression, and in sympathy with his hero, Mr. Kirk showed that he has in him the makings of an orator. The closing portion of his speech was in every way equal to anything we have heard at a Plunket Medal Contest. It was a pity, however, that he did not know the possibilities of his sympathetic voice, and its misuse here and there was jarring.
Miss Neumann, in her speech on Florence Nightingale, was obviously suffering from nervousness. From the back of the hall it was almost impossible to follow this speech. Miss Neumann's manner was quiet and restrained. If eloquence is part of oratory, we are unable to understand the judges' action in awarding the medal to this speaker.
We have on several occasions heard Mr. G. S. Troup speak much better than he did at this contest. His subject on this occasion was Abraham Lincoln. Mr. Troup had studied Lincoln's character carefully, and had evidently a sincere appreciation of the man's worth; but his speech was delivered too much in the manner of a recitation. With practice, Mr. Troup will become an efficient public speaker.
The judges (Messrs. C. B. Morison, K. C., C. E. Statham, M. P., and Edward Tregear, I. S. O.) awarded the medal to Miss Neumann. Mr. H. G. Miller they placed second, and Mr. G. H. Winder third. Sir Robert Stout presented the medal to the winner.
To The Editor of "The Spike."
Dear Sir,
I was present at the Plunket Medal Contest held in the gymnasium on Sept 15th, and so much was I exercised over the decision of the judges, that I wish to record some of the thoughts that surged up in my mind.
I have not the slightest feeling against women competing with men in contests of this kind. There are those who warmly assert that women cannot be judged by the same standard as men. I think that those people have very limited critical and rational power. They may not be able to judge men and women speakers by the same standard; those with ampler powers, can.
Oratory is not masculine or feminine. It is the power of moving an audience by the force of stirring and heartfelt words, and I submit that the winner of the contest did not display oratorical power. I feel strongly, and so I know did the majority of the audience, that the decision was made on very narrow lines. We do not doubt the honesty of the judges' decision, but feel that harm has been done, and a handle given to those who object to men and women speaking in contest. Undoubtedly, to my mind, several of the men speakers displayed great oratorical potentialities, and both gripped and thrilled their audience in a way that the "quiet" speakers, though certainly earnest, totally failed to do. Men may well, after such a decision, feel chary of speaking in contests with women if lack of energy and grip is to be dignified by the name of "quiet sincerity."
A Quondam Debater.