Plain Reflection

“I wish, too, that it were made a part of the exercise to use names; that causes more complicated, and requiring longer pleadings, were invented; that we were less afraid of words in daily use; and that we were in the habit of mingling jests with our declamation…”(380a) 

It was refreshing to hear an advocate for plain language within a group of texts that are so difficult to comprehend.  That being said, Quintilian is much easier to understand than Cicero, and I think that’s due to the concise nature of the text.  There is so much praise for Cicero, and most with good reason.  But his texts are generally bloated, where belaboring a point in different wording constitutes his style.  

Speeches that are too long are very rarely effective.  There are always exceptions (I Have A Dream-MLK), but generally the effect of persuasion within speech is more likely to affect an audience if the main point(s) are easily remembered.  For instance, if I hear a beautiful speech adorned in poetic diction that caters more to the “Grand” form of speaking, I may recall that the speech was beautiful, but not what the speech was actually about.  Alternately, if I hear a speech that resembles a “mode of speaking at the bar,” (380a) whether or not I’m impressed with the diction is of little concern because I’m able to recall the main points and extend my ponderings beyond the moment of said speech.  This extension can play a vital role in effective persuasion, because it allows the audience to reflect on the points discussed and make an informed decision after a period of thought.  Because of this, the use of plain language in speech seems to be a more moral route as opposed to rigorous declamation.  Whereas laborious declamation may aim to confuse/mislead an audience, plain diction relays the information without ‘herding’ an audience to a predetermined conclusion.