"Finished Oratory"

Quoth Sir Patrick

God gave us all two ends to use
One to think with, one to sit on
It all depends which one we choose
Heads we win, tails we lose.

This small verse provided the refreshingly informal introduction to the speech of Sir Patrick Duff, the new High Commissioner for Great Britain, who announced the winner of the Plunket Medal from the platform of the Concert Chamber last Thursday. Sir Patrick, who has seen in action the choice and master spirits of the age in the Parliament of Westminster, was still favourably impressed by the general competence of the speakers in this Oratory Contest.

After being welcomed by his fellow-judge, the Rt. Rev. Lord Bishop of Wellington, Sir Patrick informed the audience of the standards by which speakers had been judged and contending that finished oratory was the most popular, he furnished an immediatae, practical example by sitting down.

"The name of Plunket hangs like a benign influence over the whole of New-Zealand," said Mr. Howard Wadman, the third judge, who commented on the individual speakers. He offered criticism which was scintillating and trenchant, if not always kind. Throughout this report the remarks in brackets are his.

Mr. Stan Campbell in the chair, gave a brief history of the Plunket Medal and hoped that the entrants would live up to the expectations of the donor. The programme opened with a pianoforte solo by Leonie Pascoe.

Miss Joan Taylor spoke on President Roosevelt. She gave a clear if idealised exposition of his life and his great aims for America and the world. In slightly biblical tones we heard, "When they were hungry, he gave them bread; when they were homeless, he gave them shelter." Her voice was excellent but lacked modulation. (Miss Taylor is evidently a Right-Thinking Girl, but she has presented us with the standard matter of an evening paper obituary.)

Mr. Roy Jack began his speech with a picture of Indian devotion to Ghandi. Then, deploring the way in which the British accepted "with masochistic glee" all charges levelled against them, he proceeded to "debunk the Ghandi legend." (Irony was confidently used but this speech lacked cohesion. The change from presentation as a saint to denunciation as a prevaricator was not logically prepared for.)

Mr. Ivor Davies, who was to have spoken on Job, had to withdraw because of illness which he was bearing, according to Mr. Campbell, with the patience of his subject.

Mr. Kevin O'Brien took as his subject Josef Viand. He outlined his difficult life (audience comment—Viard dolorosa!) as the first Catholic Bishop of Wellington. One recognises in Mr. O'Brien's oratory a conscious restraint and solemnity which take away the vigour of his usual debating style. (This was a sentimental Victorian biography. There were too many trite phrases. One walks to Makara through a Wellington southerly, not "in unfavourable conditions.")

Mr. M. McIntyre presented his speech on Marie Curie with measured eloquence and emotion. His voice was moved as the pictured the years of struggle and victory. "The incredulous scientists could only bow before the superhuman obstinacy of a woman." (I suggest this speaker derived his matter from a two-and-fourpenneth at the Majestic. His phraseology was ornate and a little old fashioned. It is wiser not to pile on the agony with a British audience.)

Miss Kath Kelly spoke on Tom Kettle, Irish poet, patriot and philosopher. Her manner was challenging and her delivery vital, yet somehow Kettle remained an incomplete figure. (We got into, his life sideways.) But she revealed the quality of the man's mind by pithy and picturesque quotation. Lack of clarity was one of this speaker's chief faults. (She has a beautiful voice. I liked her sharp and bitter phrases. Gestures were inadequate—a despairing movement of the hands like the fins of a gasping fish.)

Miss Nell Casey presented rather a different picture of Ghandi. She gave a clear account of his life and emphasized his spiritual virtues. She made of him the saint, transcending the complete comprehension of his followers and the world. (Miss Casey's phrasing was undistinguished but she presented an integrated picture of Ghandi, if it did tend towards the Ideal Figure. Her gestures appeared practised rather than spontaneous.)

Mr. L. Neuberg opened and closed his speech with the NZU motto "Sapere aude"—"Dare to be wise." The speaker was daring too, in taking for his subject not a man of action but an an intellectual figure, a scholar—Erasmus of Rotterdam. One of the foremost thinkers of the Renaissance, Erasmus was the advocate of tolerance and enlightenment, refusing to adopt a partisan attitude in the Reformation crisis. (Mr. Neuberg presented interesting matter in words which were good and dry, without sentimentality or book-ishness.)

While the judges considered their verdict, Mr. John Davis and Miss Pascoe entertained the audience with musical items on the violin and piano. Sir Patrick Duff announced the result of the contest.

• First: Mr. Neuberg.
• Second: Miss Kelly.
• Third: Mr. Jack.