A study on Elegant Speech

[Aristide]

It appears that you've forgotten one: A gentlemen does not broadcast his presumptuousness.

[storeynicholas]

When I was nineteen, I was still under the clear impression that I should stand and sit-up straight and keep my opinions to myself, unless expressly asked for them; I was certainly not to lecture my elders on behaviour: to have done so would have been regarded as a social sin; seond only to cheating at cards. Mind you, I have since,made up for the lost time in the airing of my opinions. But then...I am fifty years old.
NJS

[Jack Albans]

Hmn. Thankfully, I am not a gentleman, though I have oft posed as one. I believe the trick is to know what the rule book says... ...and then throw it out the window.

J.

[Costi]

I find no 12 particularly interesting. Can you comment on its application?
Also, what is the source of this dodecalogue of yours?

[Costi]

Clemens dear, this social status you talk about has hardly any relevance in today's world, where any recognition is based on one's own merits and accomplishments. Education has become so widely accessible that you may find a taxi driver who is a nuclear physicist, like I did once. Privileges mean little today, even in monarchies. If you want to live a happy life you need to reconsider your view of "social classes". You are not doing the waiter, nurse or taxi driver any favour by talking to them - they are your equals as human beings and you should try to develop a genuine interest for human contact, rather than a condescending attitude. Cherish your ancestry and heritage, but don't let it spoil your enjoyment of life. Consider yourself proud to win the respect of the taxi driver, the admiration of the nurse or the friendly smile of the waiter. Speak from the heart to all of them, about matters they may understand and in a manner that doesn't suggest you are doing them a favour. Some of what you wrote are signs of behaving gentlemanly if they are meant earnestly (others are simple cliches), but it is more important to BE a gentleman in your heart (even if you occasionally don't behave like one) than to ACT like a gentleman and really be a misanthrope.

[Jack Albans]

I think we ought to be very grateful that this subject and the way it has been approached, has come up. And I trust that the obvious sincerity of the original poster - Clemens - would be held in view, at the same time as the challenges are mounted.

And mounted they must be. Even though the several points he has delivered are not entirely invalid when considered on their own.

The English language is of course a most convoluted thing. It can be both clear, sometimes deliberately unclear, and often it has scope for inner meaning that will reveal itself only to a handful.

In standard English idiom, the phrases 'the elegant speech of gentlemen,' and 'gentle speech' - are two potentially ENTIRELY different things. A further difficulty too, being in the word 'potentially...'

Personally - as I suspect others also might like - I should like to see explorations by contributers on those potential differences, before the views expressed go on along the divergent paths caused by the opaqueness of unstated definitions.

Regards,

Jack A.

[Costi]

Costi, I think you are missunderstanding me, I'm not that kind of person.

Clemens, no need to defend yourself - you are not under attack

Do you mention the fact that you eat every day? Do you mention the fact that you love your mother? Do you mention talking to your professors? Then, why make a special mention of talking to the taxi driver, the nurse, the waiter or the gardner? It wouldn't be because you do it in spite of the fact that they are not of "equal social status", like the 16-year old girls at the rally, would it?
I do hope I am misunderstanding you, but it's no wonder that your colleagues misunderstand you, too, as you wrote before - it's not even so much a matter of what you say, it's how you say it and the attitude. You will graduate this year and you will be working for a living, as I understand, while your social situation will change a lot. I think a more flexible attitude (thinking, dress etc.) will be of great help.

[Jack Albans]

This is becoming all too tempting...

I am reminded of Rowan Atkinson in "Love Actually" - please allow me to misquote terribly:

"Oh no sir. The English language is not just for communicating - it's SO-O much more...!"

The trouble with the opening of this thread is that in many great years of yore, I might have jumped to the conclusion that it was being written by someone from the People's Republic of China Embassy. That is until, of course, the old 'likee soupee?' tradition turned up upon us.

However in these times, the whole absolutist, false antithesis theme that runs through it calls to mind the possibility of it having been composed by a modern-era Turing Machine. I am reminded of my own personal experience with a local university department that had been spending research monies to discover artificial intelligence - an endeavour that caused me personally (I attribute this to myself!) to remark to the head 'in your efforts to find artificial intelligence, you have most assuredly discoverd genuine stupidity.'

And so, it is with much trepidation that I look at the 12-point basis of this art, as possibly being composed by a youngish student of English... And yet even so I can't help thinking that the Spanish gardener might have been a runaway 'Manuel.'

What 'art' has a basis of 12 points - or a hundred and twelve, for that matter. And I wish I didn't have to sound so critical.

Regards, J.A.

[couch]

What 'art' has a basis of 12 points . . . .

Umm, typography?

[Costi]

And so, it is with much trepidation that I look at the 12-point basis of this art, as possibly being composed by a youngish student of English...

Gaudeamus igitur
Juvenes dum sumus.

[storeynicholas]

"Talk not to me of a name great in story,
The days of our youth are the days of our glory.
The myrtles and ivies of sweet two and twenty.
Are worth all your laurels, though ever so plenty."
(Byron).

[Costi]

What 'art' has a basis of 12 points . . . .

Umm, typography?

Excellent!

[Jordan Marc]

A Gentleman speaks in a calm manner and never yells at anyone.

Wishful thinking, Clemens. Apparently you've never had the experience of a wildass ride through midtown Manhattan with a Pakistani taxi driver yakking on his cellphone in his native tongue. It is against the law in the city, and you have no recourse except to tell the driver to slow down and get off the phone. You do so repeatedly and at the top of your lungs, which is the verbal equivalent of a colonial putting his booted foot against the neck of a native. Assuming you're lucky enough to arrive at your destination unscathed, you pay the fare but leave no tip. This invariably elicits an angry response from the driver, which is meaningless considering he's got a fast meter, so you smile and say politely: "You're welcome."

Gentlemen aren't as gentlemanly as you would like to believe. Wishful thinking doesn't make it so. Unless you're angling for sainthood, you need to rethink your notions about elegant speech.

JMB

[storeynicholas]

Queen Victoria Street, EC4.
NJS

[Costi]

Queen Victoria Street, EC4.
NJS

As I wrote before, a gentleman - whatever that means today - is certainly not a robot who acts like a mobile phone company customer service representative. Having a temperament other than flegmatic is not ungentlemanly. Neither is getting angry, annoyed or bored. Reaction also depends on who is standing in front of you and what kind of reaction they are able to understand. On the other hand, polite indifference may be more offensive than a temperamental outburst. Between being diplomatic and genuine, the latter wins more general sympathy and is also good for your complexion in the long run
And above all, you have to BE it rather than LOOK it: being a gentleman is a matter of substance; appearance and manners follow naturally.