:"\
ABSTRACT
BERNARD SHAW: PUBLIC SPEAKER
by Dorothy Skriletz
Although Bernard Shaw achieved a measure of fame as
a lecturer in London before becoming a successful playwright,
studies of him as a speaker have been few and limited in
scope. This study is concerned with this relatively neg—
lected aspect of Shaw's life, particularly with discovering
(1) biographical and historical factors related to his speak-
ing, (2) theories of public speaking held by Shaw, (3) avail-
ability of speech texts. and (4) nature of his speaking as
revealed through the detailed analysis of a speech.
Biographical and historical factors related to Shaw's
aEeaking.—-Since biographies of Shaw and histories of the
period in which he lived are plentiful, the emphasis in the
investigation of this phase of the problem was upon culling
out. from the vast amount of material available.
information
pertinent to understanding Shaw as a speaker. While the
narrative, combining biographical and historical factors,
covers the period from 1856 to 1950, events having the greatest
bearing upon Shaw's Speaking are stressed.
3::
ha
'5
-
u
o..-
Dorothy Skriletz
Theories of_public Speaking held by Shaw.-- Research
for this phase of the study focused upon material written by
or quoting Shaw which expressed theories of public speaking.
Such comments by him appeared in critiques of other speakers,
as advice to others on speaking, and in his reports of his
own platform experiences. Although observations made by
others about Shaw are occasionally included for illustrative
purposes, the theories are derived directly from Shaw's
statements. These are develOped in this paper under the
categories of: general comments about public speaking, prepa-
ration, content, and delivery. Although Shaw's comments on
delivery have often been cited, this study reveals his con-
cern with, and understanding of, a wide range of speech
theory. Moreover, though Shaw's speaking career began when
"elocution" was in vogue, his theories bear a striking simi-
larity to those held by many present day teachers of speech.
Availability of speech texts.--Although recently pub-
lished collections of speeches have been invaluable contri-
butions to studies of Shaw as a speaker, they by no means
contain all the extant texts. The emphasis in this study was
to search through collected writings, biographies, critical
studies, and periodicals for Shavian texts or references to
specific speeches. The findings are arranged in chronological
order, giving for each text, summary, or reported speech the
Dorothy Skriletz
date, occasion, subject or title, and all known locations of
this material. Although only limited conclusions regarding
audiences and choice of subjects are possible, the informa-
tion discovered indicates that a number of additional studies
of Shaw as a speaker are feasible and desirable.
Nature of his speaking as revealed through the analy-
sis of a speech. While Shaw's practices in all speech situ-
ations are not thereby revealed, the analysis of a speech in
depth through the case study method gives another dimension
to our knowledge of the speaker. Shaw's 1929 B. B. C. broad-
cast "On Democracy" was selected for this purpose. For the
analysis, two versions of the text were collated and a sub-
stance outline prepared. Shaw used a basic pattern of in-
troduction-definition—problem-solution—conclusion, with the
first three divisions most fully develOped. Frequent use of
sign, causal, and inductive reasoning patterns--often remain-
ing at the assertion level; many analogies and illustrations;
extensive use of authority of self; and a great amount of
sensory proof appear in this speech. The most outstanding
element of style is the juxtapositioning of familiar words,
phrases, or ideas in unusual combinations, resulting in what
is often described as Shavian humor. Unfortunately, compara—
tively little of note was discovered regarding either the
occasion or the response.
Finally, the Appendix contains the collated text and
work sheets used in the case studv.
BERNARD SHAW:
PUBLIC SPEAKER
by
{vi-l
4o ‘
DorothyJSkriletz
A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Speech
1966
C0pyright by
DOROTHY SKRILETZ
1966
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My appreciation for the inestimable aid of Dr.
Kenneth G. Hance, Department of Speech, in guiding this
study and directing my graduate work can best be expressed
by a resolve to reflect his influences in my own teaching
career.
To thank all who have given unsparingly of their
time would be difficult, but I wish to give special thanks
to the other members of my committee: Dr. David C. Ralph
and Dr. Gordon L. Thomas of the Department of Speech and
Dr. Elwood P. Lawrence of the Department of English for
their help and guidance; to the Reference Librarians of
Michigan State University for their aid in obtaining mate-
rial through Inter-Library Loan; for the National Voice
Library for allowing me access to Shaw recordings; to Dan H.
Laurence for sending me material on Shaw; and to the faculty
and administration of California State College, Long Beach,
for granting a Sabbatical Leave which enabled me to complete
this study.
An attempt to say as much as I would wish to my
family and friends for their help and encouragement would
still be too little: I know that the full meaning of a
simple "thank you" will be understood by them.
ii
inc-0‘01
_ o
.x.. -‘ n
CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
IMRODUCTION O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Vi
Chapter
I. BIOGRAPHICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND . . . 1
Years of Youth in Ireland
Years of Fabian Socialism and Essay
Writing
Years of Increased Dramatic Writing
Years of Political Frustration and
Increasing Fame as a
Dramatist
Years of Homage and Decline
II. SHAW'S THEORIES OF PUBLIC SPEAKING . . . . . 83
General Comments About Public Speaking
The value of public speaking to the
individual
Public speaking as a function of a
free society
The responsibilities of a speaker
The effectiveness of public Speaking in
achieving a particular goal
Preparation
Underlying assumptions related to
preparation
Analysis of the audience, including
time and place
Selection of the subject
Getting the necessary information
Preparing for delivery
Content
Audience analysis
The speaker must realize the nature of
the audiences in general
The speaker must realize the nature of
Specific audiences
The speaker must not misinterpret
audience reactions.
iii
Statement of contentions and attention
factors
DevelOping an argument
The speaker should know the steps in reason-
ing by which his conclusions are
reached and should make these
clear to his audience
The speaker should have an ample fund of
factual material to support his
contentions
The speaker Should use illustrations,
especially those which come from
personal experience, to amplify
his assertions
Refutation
Delivery
The extemporaneous method
Bodily action
Voice and articulation
Summary
III. SHAW'S SPEECHES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Purpose and Nature of Entries
The Speeches Listed
Summary
Audiences
Selection of subjects
Suggestions for further study
IV. A CASE STUDY: "ON DEMOCRACY," B. B. C.
RADIO BROADCAST, OCTOBER 14, 1929 . . . . . 202
Justification for Selection of "On
Democracy"
The Speaking Occasion
Textual Variations
The nature of the variations
The relative accuracy of each text
The Substance Outline
Disposition
Invention
The introduction
The definition of the key term, "democracy"
iv
"VINO.
n
'woo'
‘
s
,‘lvo
"o-
A...Q‘
-
-‘.' b:
The description of the problem
The refutation of possible solutions and
re-establishment of the problem
The solutions to the problem
The conclusion
Summary of Invention
Style
Response
V. SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
Part I: Collated Text: "On Democracy"
Part II: Work Sheets: "On Democracy"
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . 331
'v.
.
u... , ‘
n
i ~~
- .-
-.. i».
.
he. ‘ .-
n.-
. .c.
.
.
.
u
q
d
‘
I
i
A
h
i
.I 4
u
I a
-.. _
n
s
_ \ “
.-
'1
I
I.
§.-.
‘.I_
v
'Q
..
A
.u
\' h:
s
-
.t
‘9-
' n
v
s
h“
'-
.l
u
L
s
o
.
a a
\ .
~
.
I
.
. o
I' '
IN TRODUCT I ON
Purpose of Study
The name George Bernard Shaw evokes many images,
the most common being "p1aywright;" "humorist;" "critic;"
"essayist." Relatively seldom recalled is "public speaker."
Yet Shaw was a man described by one of his biographers as a
prolific public Speaker.
He Spoke to audiences of every description from
University dons to London washerwomen. From
1883 to 1895, with virtually no exception, he
delivered a harangue, with debate, questions,
and so on, every Sunday--sometimes twice or
- 1
even thr1ce--and on a good many weekdays.
Evidence exists, furthermore, that Shaw did not re-
gard his public speaking activity as a mere diversion from
his other interests. In a letter dated December 2, 1894,
in which Shaw answers a young man who asked how to train
himself to become a critic, Shaw includes the following in
his remarks on a program of education: "Join debating
societies and learn to speak in public. Haunt little Sunday
evening political meetings and exercise that accomplishment.
lArchibald Henderson, George Bernard Shaw: Man of
the Century (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1956),
p. 228.
vi
.
a. ...
>-
... ....
‘0‘
a I': '
«.- .. l
‘V‘, n..
'u. I.‘
.
.q. .
-
a.
. s
'“. :-
.. “
.
_ ‘44.
Q h‘
. s
.-
‘ .'
I. .I
..
kI
'u
. ‘
\ -' -
K“
‘
I.-
‘6’
I. ‘
s
‘e
‘: '-
.\
C
I
,
I I
Study of men and politics in this way."1 Shaw also seemed
to link his success as a playwright to his experience as a
public speaker. In one letter Shaw instructed H. G. Wells
on the techniques of public speaking and concluded his re-
marks with, "What is more, when you become a rhetorician,
you will have acquired a new literary power. Why is it that
you can't write a play, and I can? You think it is because
you don't choose. Yahi"
The purpose of this study is to explore this com-
paratively neglected aspect of Shaw's life--his public
Speaking. More Specifically, this study of Bernard Shaw as
a public Speaker will include (1) an investigation of the
biographical and historical background pertinent to under-
standing him as a speaker, (2) an examination of the theories
of public Speaking which he expressed, (3) a determination
of the availability and nature of extant Speeches, and (4)
an analysis in depth of a Shavian speech.
Limitations Imposed
In a presidential address before the Shaw Society of
America, Archibald Henderson stated
1Bernard Shaw, Letters to a Young Critic, notes and
intro. by E. J. West (New York: Crown Publishers, 1955),
p. 14.
2
Letter quoted in St. John Ervine, Bernard Shaw:
His Life, WOrk, and Friends (New York: William Morrow and
Company, 1956), p. 419.
vii
q
n
‘
~.
I
‘ I
‘-
o
D
‘.
. . . Shaw is a man who has ploughed many furrows.
He once told me that he had fifteen different
reputations; and actually enumerated them: a
critic of art, a critic of music, a critic of
literature, a critic of the drama, a novelist,
a dramatist, an economist, a funny man, a street-
corner agitator, a Shelleyan atheist, a Fabian
Socialist, a vegetarian, a humanitarian, a
preacher, and a philosoPher.l
Limitations in any study are imperative; this wide
range of interests and activities of Shaw makes limitation
doubly imperative. The problem is complicated by the inter-
relationship of many of Shaw's activities, and by his pen-
chant for dealing with the same subject in a number of
different ways. For example, one of Shaw's concerns is
prOper articulation. He wrote of this in his remarks about
public speaking, incorporated his views toward it into his
criticisms, made articulation and pronunciation an issue
in one of his major plays, and served on the BBC'S Commit-
~tee on the Pronunciation of Doubtful Words. Thus, the major
writings by and about Shaw must be consulted to discover
points of view related to public Speaking; but this paper
will not be concerned with the develOpment of ideas as such
in the plays, essays, novels, and criticisms of Bernard Shaw.
Biographical and historical background will be a
part of this study only insofar as is necessary to understand
l
Archibald Henderson, "Where Shaw Stands Today,"
The4§haw Review, I (March, 1951), 5.
viii
g.
I’-
a u- a
0-.
u... .
~...v]
‘
I... '
-.-. g.
....'.-
\—
u.....
c
'A
‘ u
u...~'
‘.,. .-
'-- z-
I. ...
a
.. .‘.
‘ .
«. ‘._
' :-
-.,_
l.“
. a‘n
.. ~
~‘_‘
0
1‘ ‘ .
.
‘ 5.
\_~
Shaw as a Speaker. A number of biographies of Shaw are
readily available.1 An even greater number of histories
are available for the period in which Shaw lived. The his-
toric, economic, and social milieu in which Shaw lived and
spoke changed radically from 1856 to 1950. While the speaker
must be placed in perspective, this paper will not attempt
to describe Shaw's life in detail nor to give an extensive
description of changes in Great Britain and Ireland in the
course of nearly a century.
For a number of years Shaw was active in the Fabian
Society, and no study of Shaw as a speaker is possible with-
out some description of that organization. Again, however,
no attempt will be made to give the history and influence
of the Fabians on British politics except as they might
relate to Shaw's speaking activities.
Studies of public Speakers often include the tracing
of ideas or an attempt to discover What influences led to a
speaker's advocating a particular belief or course of action.
__1
A partial list of such biographies includes St.
thn Ervine, Bernard Shaw: His Life, Work, and Friends (New
York: William Morrow and Company, 1956); Frank Harris,
Eggnard Shaw (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1931); Archi-
bald Henderson, George Bernard Shaw: Man of the Centupy
(New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1956); Hesketh Pearson,
,§§§: A Full-Lengph Portrait (New York and London: Harper
and Brothers, 1942); Pearson, GBS, a Postscript (New York:
Harper, 1950); Robert F. Rattray, Bernard Shaw: A Chronicle
(New York: Roy Publishers, 1951).
ix
Such will not be a function of this paper except incidentally.
As stated earlier, the same subject is dealt with by Shaw in
a number of different activities. Furthermore, Shaw concerned
himself with a wide variety of political, economic, philo-
sophic, and social problems. More important, however, the
develOpment and evaluation of Shaw's beliefs have been made
the subject of many critical works which take into consider-
ation all his activities, not merely his public speaking.
The reader will be referred to apprOpriate related studies
whenever necessary. Major influences upon his public Speak-
ing or those influences which appear to affect his Speaking
are, of course, within the scope of this paper.
One final limitation is necessary. No attempt will
be made to find the original manuscripts of material eventu-
ally published by Shaw or of letters attributed to him and
‘published by others. Such work has been undertaken by count-
less others. Similarly, even though one aspect of this
study will be concerned with the problem of locating as
nmny Speech texts as possible, emphasis will not be upon
consulting original Speech manuscripts. Although Shaw is
known to have delivered some Speeches by reading from manu-
script, the fact that the vast majority of his speeches were
extemporaneous appears well-established through reports of
biOgraphers, friends, and Shaw himself. Thus, an emphasis
uPOn consulting and studying in detail the few manuscripts
X
.-
._ u.»
"‘.‘.'.:
.. a.
I‘ll A.
.
"‘u. ...
V.-
U
U.
[I
.. _
-c
"rtx
~
. .
°: .
N :- u
~i
-0
D.
.
ï¬..
.-
... .
‘Q
of the Speeches which were read could tend to distort the
over-all view of Shaw as a speaker. Determining and noting
the location of such manuscripts wherever possible will, of
course, be part of the study.
Justification of Project
To question whether a man such as Bernard Shaw is
worthy of study would appear presumptuous in light of the
many critical works published by recognized scholars. To
question whether Bernard Shaw is worthy of study as a public
speaker does, however, appear appropriate.
A cursory reading of Shaw biographies reveals many
references to his Speaking activity. He has been described
as being sought after as a Speaker. At the same time, con-
flicting evaluative Opinions have appeared. Furthermore,
the importance Shaw placed on public speaking has been men-
tioned previously. Thus, this phase in the life of a man
known throughout most of the civilized world should not be
neglected.
In recent years the speaking activity of Bernard
Shaw has been given some attention, as will be noted below,
but no study of the type contemplated here has been dis-
covered. Related doctoral or master's theses include such
Works as:
Bonsall, Yvonne C. "Shaw's Concept of a Great
Ruler." Unpublished Master's thesis, State
ups
University of Iowa, 1959.
Dupler, Dorothy. "An Analytical Study of
the Use of Rhetorical Devices in Three Selected
Plays of George Bernard Shaw: Saint Joan,
Androcles and the Lion, and Candida." Unpublished
Ph. D. dissertation, University of Southern
California, 1961.
Hummert, Paul A. "Marxist Elements in the
Works of George Bernard Shaw." Unpublished Ph. D.
dissertation, Northwestern University, 1955.
MacIntyre, Janet J. "The Origins of George
Bernard Shaw's Life Force PhilOSOphy." Unpub-
lished Master's thesis, University of Georgia, 1962.
Mills, John A. "Language and Laughter: A Study
of Comic Diction in the Plays of Bernard Shaw."
Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Indiana University,
1961.
Scott, Robert Lee. "Bernard Shaw's Rhetorical
Drama: A Study of Rhetoric and Poetic in Selected
Plays." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University
of Illinois, 1955.
Silverman, Albert H. "Bernard Shaw's Political
Extravanganzas." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation,
Tulane University, 1955.
Villeux, Jere S. "An Analysis of the Rhetorical
Situation and Rhetorical Character Types in Selected
Plays." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University
of Minnesota, 1957.
While these studies noted above may offer material
helpful to an understanding of Shaw as a Speaker, their pri-
nmry concern is not that of this study. Furthermore, although
Shaw has been the subject of a number of theses and disserta-
tions in addition to those noted, such studies deal specifi-
callywith his plays, novels, and essays and are not included
in the above list.
xii
D '-
cbeb. --
coup.
too-.51
‘-
‘\ In.
‘. . b
.
-
‘~
‘Ali
g
~.“' In‘
..
'-
.v
o 2‘“.
's -.
-~.~
-
I.
n
3"â€.
-. ~ _-
uh.
.
h“
n u.
u“ : ~
v.
1
C
u."
'I:-‘(;‘
. .“
.
§ .‘ I
'.:~"‘.
u u‘ I
In the published works dealing with Shaw, numerous
references to Shaw's speaking are made by biographers and
critics. These references not only give the date and place
of some of Shaw's speeches, but also include quotations
which give reactions of contemporaries to Shaw as a Speaker.
None, however, concerns itself with a thorough analysis of
Shaw as a Speaker.
A handful of published material concerned with Shaw
as a public speaker Should be reported in greater detail,
however, to justify this study as distinctive: a collection
of speeches edited by Dan H. Laurence,1 another collection
of speeches edited by Warren Sylvester Smith,2 and a rhetori-
cal study, "George Bernard Shaw: Rhetorician and Public
Speaker," by Marie Hochmuth Nichols.3
The first published collection devoted to Shaw's
Speeches, Platform and Pplpit edited by Laurence, is a signi—
ficant and valuable contribution to an understanding of Shaw
as a speaker. Although the introduction furnishes an extremely
k
1Bernard Shaw, Platform and Pulpit, ed. and intro.
(Dan H. Laurence (New York: Hill and Wang, 1961.)
Bernard Shaw, The Religious Speeches of Bernard
Shaw, ed. and intro. Warren Sylvester Smith, foreword by
Arthur H. Nethercot (University Park: Pennsylvania State
University Press, 1963).
3Marie Hochmuth Nichols, Rhetoric and Criticism
(Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1963).
xiii
.
s..‘ ...
I .n
tau-o...»
“0...!
' .
“up
_ u
u.. ..‘,
‘
v.7
I, ‘ ~.
.‘ncu.
n
‘0:
o.
n ‘0
a...
I...‘
c.‘
.u
.
‘h
I", -
.‘ _
.
1
‘ 0
\_ P-
.
.,.
A.
.;‘s.
. c ~
~‘
~
. v
\ ‘
. .
.
.‘._
.
b
.
.
I
p
1"
I 'I
helpful insight into Shaw's practices as a speaker, espe-
cially in his early years, and some telling descriptions of
audience reactions to his speaking, the comparatively brief
essay does not go into the details of Shaw as a speaker pro-
posed for this study, especially in terms of theories, avail-
ability of additional speeches, and analysis of a speech in
depth.
Similarly, Smith's collection of the speeches on
religion delivered by Shaw is an important source of infor-
mation for a study of Shaw as a speaker. Though the book
contains valuable descriptions of audiences and delivery,
the emphasis in both Nethercot's foreword and Smith's intro-
duction is upon the development of Shaw's thinking upon
religion. Thus, this material does not negate the need for
a study such as the one prOposed.
While the study by Marie Hochmuth Nichols contributes
substantially to Shaw's stature as a public speaker meriting
the attention of those in the field of speech, this published
erk differs in both sc0pe and approach from the one proposed
in this investigation. Without attempting to note all such
particulars, a chief difference in sc0pe, for example, lies
in the prOposed attempt of this study to discover and note
Shavian Speech texts which are available. To understand the
Chief differences in approach in the two studies, two charac-
teristics of the Nichols paper should be noted: a tendency
xiv
to generalize upon Shavian Speaking practices from a limited
number of available Speeches; and the derivation of Shavian
theories of public speaking from the limited speeches avail-
able and from observations of Shaw as a Speaker made by
others. While such contributions are noteworthy and although
many conclusions reached by the approach contemplated for
this study may prove to be very similar to those derived by
Nichols, the procedure outlined below appears to differ suf-
ficiently from hers to contribute to an understanding of
Shaw as a public Speaker.
Materials and Sources
Materials necessary for a study of Shaw as a speaker
can be divided into two broad categories: that which fur—
nishes the necessary background for understanding Shaw as a
speaker, and that which provides the Speeches to be studied.
One kind of material necessary is that giving the
historical, economic, and social background in which Shaw
Spoke. As no difficulty exists in finding sources for this
information, it does not appear essential to list histories
Of Great Britain here. Material also is available which deals
Specifically with the Fabian Society: Margaret Isabel (Post-
gate) Cole, The Story of Fabian Socialism (Stanford, Califor-
nia: Stanford University Press, 1961); Edward R. Pease, The
Eistory of the Fabian_§ocie§y (3rd ed. with a new intro° by
XV
':v~:v30
.Audoau~
.
‘ I
P 9a.. ..
O-IG' .
-
:nouu. . .
o....._.
u
u .
.D- .._.
k... v-â€:
t. . Q
c. ‘A..
.
.. .
.o s ,,
.,‘ g
.
. .
h
I
~.
'I
I. T
Q I
'\
.
...
~. ‘A.
‘ ,
‘~ :.
\“
i
.. _
4, ~.
‘ .
.
.
‘-
‘ F
.
Margaret Cole; London: F. Cass, 1963); A. M. McBriar,
Fabian Socialism and English PoliticsL51884-1918 (Cambridge,
England: University Press, 1962).
Biographies giving background information have al-
ready been listed.1 Further reports of Shaw's speaking
activities, as well as reactions to his speeches, are avail—
able in biographies, autobiographies, and published journals
of the Webbs, Annie Besant, Graham Wallas, William Morris,
and others associated with Shaw in his Fabian days. Two
periodicals of late Victorian England, Our Corner and To-Day,
also have reports of Shaw Speeches.
Critical works which have Shaw as a subject will give
further necessary background information. Related theses
and dissertations are listed on pp. xi-xii. Just a few of
the published criticisms which contain pertinent material
are: Eric Bentley, Bernard Shaw, 1856-1950 (Amended ed.;
New'York: New Directions Books, 1957); C. E. M. Joad, Shaw
(London: Gollancz, 1949); Louis Kronenberger (ed.), George
jgrnard Shaw: A Critical Survey (lst ed.; Cleveland: World
Publishing Company, 1953); Stephen Winsten (ed.), G. B. S. 90
(London: Hutchison & Co. Ltd., 1946).
Finally, and most importantly, background material
for understanding the Speaker can be found in Shaw's works.
‘
1 .
See p. 1x.
xvi
q-..
. =---
u...“. s
h
’:
- «,.‘
‘
'1
UI
‘ \
‘-
I“. .
n.
.h u
p
I I
s‘.
‘I 'A
‘s L—
' a
.
. V
\‘ I
U A.
.. ,
.
Of these, the following are especially essential for an
understanding of Shaw as a speaker: The Complete Prefaces
of Bernard Shaw (London: Hamlyn, 1965); Essays in Fabian
Sggialism (London: Constable and Company Limited, 1932,
1949); Everybody's Political What's What (2nd ed.; London:
Constable and Company Limited, 1945, 1950 and New York:
Dodd, Mead & Company, 1944, 1947); Sixteen Self Sketches
(New York: Dodd, Mead & Company, 1949). This last volume
contains a chapter titled, "How I Became a Public Speaker."
The second major category of sources is that of the
speeches themselves. Two collections of Shaw speeches have
already been mentioned, as have been the biographies which
contain Speech excerpts. Examples of additional speeches
available for study are "Democracy," a radio broadcast of
1929, published in the preface of The Apple Cart; "Do We
Agree?" a debate with G. K. Chesterton; "The Future of
Political Science in America," address, New York, 1933, the
only one given in the United States; "So Long, So Long,"
radio broadcast of 1937, with both the published manuscript
and recording available.
Â¥
1 ... .
See pp. Xiii-Xiv.
2The few speeches listed here are intended as ex-
amples only. An attempt to give a complete listing of speech
sOurces in the body of this paper is one of the goals in this
study.
xvii
. .gnc'a
.-
f
oer. -
..:"v- a
‘°"-.-5
.. _
..,' bu
......
“~..
-
. \
' "is.
' C
h‘.
T...
\
-..
I
‘ .
II'I- .
'u._ I
.~_.‘
u.
..
- .
\
e“
t.‘
a,“
... .-
"v
\"
u..-
wt.
\
n
._ a. .
‘- 1"
Plan of Research
The plan of research for this study centers upon the
discovery and examination of material by and about Shaw which
have bearing on the following questions: (1) What aspects
of the biographic information available help us to under—
stand Shaw as a Speaker? (2) What are the details of the
historical background which enable us better to understand
Shaw's speeches? (3) What did Shaw have to say about public
speaking in general and about preparation, content, and
delivery in particular? (4) What speech texts are available,
on what subjects, and to whom addressed? and (5) What does a
Case study of a speech reveal to us about his speech prac-
‘tices. Although all major works which bear a direct rela-
tlionship to Shaw's speaking will be investigated, this paper
‘Vvill not purport to study in detail all writing done by Shaw.1
rI‘lhe process of tracing every "letter to the editor" Shaw
“Wnrote or of minutely examining his musical criticisms, for
chample, promises negligible results in understanding Bernard
=5=‘-‘.lhaw the speaker.
~.___ -
1The volume of Shaw's writing is hinted at by the
:1ESDllowing statement he made: ". . . Though I cannot say
“:Jhat no day of it [my long life] has been left without a
“"'Iitten line, yet I have perhaps brought it as near to
‘tflhat Roman ideal as is healthily and humanly possible."
:Iin.Sixteen Self Sketches (New York: Dodd, Mead & Company,
1 949) . p. 21.
xviii
Similarly, there will be no pretense of reading all
that has been written about Shaw. "Only someone with a
fanatic's ardor and an archaeologist's Skill could read all
the criticism that has been written about Shaw, and even he
would need to master several dozen languages, or maintain a
staff of resident translators."
The material described up to this point in this paper
will, of course, be investigated, as well as additional mate-
rial suggested within the texts of those works. All listings
--bib1iographies, The Readers' Guide, and The New York Times
Index, for example--will be screened to discover those ap-
Jpearing to have a direct relationship to Shaw's speaking
activities. Particular emphasis in research will be upon
iiinding published manuscripts of Shavian speeches.
Plan of Report
The body of this report will consist of five major
Q ivisions .
~3§§:iographica1 and historical background
Biographical and historical material will be combined
:i~ln this study. Shaw often drew upon events and conditions of
‘lrlzis day for Speech subjects, and many historical changes
\
Louis Kronenberger (ed.), George Bernard Shaw: A
SEEgpitical Sgrveyp(1st ed.; Cleveland: World Publishing Com-
bany, 1953), p. xiv.
xix
.
nan-V’s!
shun-0 v“
u
.- . q.~v
.
...v- i.‘
l 4
n- n..-
i I an!
no- app-l
.
On
‘
0n. .'
cl ' "
O... .,
a-
C
-
occurred during his life span. The combination not only will
help give the historical, economic, and social background of
his Speaking activity but will help limit biographical fac-
tors to those having a bearing on his Speaking. This chapter
will, in turn, be divided into the following sections:
1856 - 1876 -- Years of Youth in Ireland
1876 - 1898 -- Years of Fabian Socialism and Essay
Writing
1898 - 1914 -- Years of Increased Dramatic Writing
1914 - 1931 -- Years of Political Frustration and
Increasing Fame as a Dramatist
1931 - 1950 -- Years of Homage and of Decline
In each biographical period the historical background
ianortant to an understanding of his speaking will be incor-
IPCIrated. References to Speaking will be made a part of the
Iliarrative, but details of such activity will be left for a
S3‘labsequent chapter.
~§§El3aw's views on public speaking
Comments about the importance of public speaking,
isNipproaches to speech-making, develOpment of arguments, and
Ztsiactors of delivery, for example, appear throughout Shaw's
““'ï¬ritings. Although attempts have been made to derive some
<:>:f Shaw's theories from his available speeches or from a com-
jh3flination of Speeches and some Shavian statements about speak-
ijdng, a comprehensive study based solely on Shaw's direct
XX
.O-O-"l
...- in i‘
.
me! ‘O
...u ...
'V‘.' ~~u
v..o.i ..
O
\n n .
6‘ "‘
I ‘ ...
a
.. :
I†P-
-
... b.
tn.
...-0
a, '-
"~..-:
-
...
h
b 1.
-
‘
:n‘O.
..-
'Q
~'.
‘5
’-
.t.
.
3‘ -
‘ I
\
U
a
‘s
'. .
'C
.I Ii
\ 5. ‘
"v. C
I‘- :V.
“v"
|,, . o '.
comments relating to theories of Speech has not been made.
Such information will be derived from those Shavian writings
in which he gives advice about speaking to others, presents
critiques of other speakers, or describes his own experiences
as a speaker.1 While comments of those who heard him Speak
will be incorporated into the study to furnish background
information wherever such is applicable, the emphasis will
be upon statements published by, or attributed to, Shaw
which relate to rhetorical theory in the areas of general
comments about speech, preparation, content, and delivery.
Overview of Shaw's speaking activity
As previously stated, the chapter giving biographical
information will contain references to Shavian speeches. The
purpose and content of this chapter, however, will be sub-
stantially different. Here an attempt will be made to list
chronologically all Speeches for which Specific references
can be found. Wherever possible the description of Speeches
will include place delivered and/or audience, the subject of
Throughout this chapter, as well as in other portions
of the paper, many quotations from Shaw's works will appear.
Those familiar with Shaw's writings recognize that he often
used unique spelling and punctuation, and noting each of
these variations from common procedure would necessitate an
interpolation of pig in the majority of direct quotations.
Even though Shaw's practices were not always consistent, the
unique spelling and punctuation used by him -- and by Laurence
-- will appear in this study without the interpolated gig.
xxi
a I“. u
‘ I
v-.-r~
o
. I
~- onâ€...
0' o- ..u-
...--1
.~-- ‘I
'.'40’ ..
... .
.‘ :-
‘Oi..- -
a
'-
.
. n
‘ v
‘nu .
the speech, and the location of the published manuscript of
the speech or portion of it. Absence of a published manu-
script will not preclude listing the Speech: if a citation
is found regarding the place delivered or subject without a
specific date, such speeches will also be noted. In addi-
tion, the implications of these findings upon this and subse—
quent studies will be discussed.
The case study
Even though no attempt will be made to generalize
about Shaw's practices in all speaking Situations, a case
study can furnish worthwhile information about the nature
of decisions made by Shaw in at least one instance of speech-
nmking. Not only can such a case study give a more complete
picture of Shaw as a speaker than would be possible with only
the material noted above, but tendencies which substantiate
or negate generalizations about him made by others might be
revealed with such a method.
The procedure typical of rhetorical case studies will
be followed: that of basing the discussion upon a substance
outline and technical plot. After a description of the
speech occasion and the collation of texts in an attempt to
determine accuracy, Disposition and Invention will be analyzed.
Emphasis will be placed upon discovering the logical, ethical,
and sensory proof used by Shaw in the speech selected for
xxii
illustrative purposes. Insofar as the accuracy of the text
in reflecting the speech as delivered can be established,
the Style in this particular speech will then be considered.
Finally, audience response to the Speech will be discussed
to complete the case study.
Although the Speech cannot furnish conclusive evi—
dence of Shaw's practice in all Situations, this investiga-
tion in depth can reveal the tendencies in his Speaking,
many of which have been subject to generalizations by others.
Summary
The final chapter will be devoted to a summary of
findings. Any conclusions warranted by the study will be
included in this portion, and areas needing further investi-
gation will be noted.
Nearly a century after Shaw first began his writing
and Speaking career, critical studies of this active man are
still appearing with regularity. There is no reason to
believe this will be the last one--even on a limited aspect
of his career.
xxiii
CHAPTER I
BIOGRAPHICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Public speaking cannot be studied in a vacuum. Both
the man and the world in which he lived must be examined if
a Speaker's communications to his fellow man are to be under-
stood. Admittedly, both the depth and breadth of biographi-
cal and historical background must be limited; a rhetorical
study must deal selectively with the incidents of a man's
life and time if focus is to remain upon his public Speaking
career.
Such is the case in a study of Bernard Shaw as a pub—
lic speaker. To facilitate grasping the complex activities
of a man Whose life spanned nearly a century, the material
dealt with in this chapter is divided into five sections.
Although the divisions are somewhat arbitrary at times, both
biographical and historical events appear to justify the divid-
ing dates selected in this study.
To review briefly, the sections are as follows: 1856-
l876--Years of Youth in Ireland; 1876-1898—-Years of Fabian
Socialism and Essay Writing; 1898-1914-—Years of Increased
Dramatic Writing; 1914-l931--Years of Political Frustration
3:.
P;
‘-
In
4..
.-
‘i
In"
flu
2
and Increasing Fame as a Dramatist; l93l—l950--Years of Homage
and of Decline.
The selection of 1876 as the closing date for "Years
of Youth in Ireland" is, obviously, dictated by Shaw's move
from Dublin to London when he was approaching his twentieth
birthday.
The selection of a date for the end of the period,
"Years of Fabian Socialism and Essay Writing," requires more
detailed justification, for Shaw continued to be both a Fabian
and an essayist throughout his life. Emphasis of activity,
then, becomes an important factor. Although it is true that
his dramatic writing began to take up more and more of his
time as early as 1895, it was not until 1898 that his plays
began to appear in published form.1 Even more important to
a study of a public speaker, 1898 appears to mark a change
in Shaw's Speaking activities: “. . .from that time (about
1898) LShaw] abandoned his weekly pulpiteering, thenceforth
Speaking only on special occasions like any other politician."
Similarly, the closing date for "Years of Increased
Dramatic Writing" may be arbitrary in that Shaw's writing of
1Robert F. Rattray, in Bernard Shaw: A Chronicle
(New York: Roy Publishers, 1951), p. 120, points out the
uniqueness of such a decision. See pp. 55-56 of this study
for amplification.
2 .
Hesketh Pearson, G. B. S.: A Full Length Portrait
(Garden City, New York: Garden City Publishing Co., Inc.
1942). p. 57.
2
3
plays continued throughout his life. Again, however,other
factors which seem to have bearing on Shaw as a speaker must
be considered. The year 1914 marks, of course, the outbreak
of World War I; and Shaw's reaction to Britain's role during
that time prompted comments from him which led to his virtual
Ostracism by fellow dramatists as well as by the general
public. .He Spent a considerable amount of time during the
period attempting to vindicate himself.
The closing date of the period "Years of Political
Frustration and Increasing Fame as a Dramatist" also may ap-
pear arbitrary. AS noted above, this period includes the
frustrating events stemming from his writings about the war
as well as the high honor of a Nobel Prize. The date 1931
was selected as the end of this phase of Shaw's life, again,
for factors which appear to have bearing on his public Speak-
ing. In 1931 Britain was feeling the effects of the Depres-
sion; a Coalition Government was formed when the Labour Party
seemed unable to c0pe with the problem; and Shaw visited
Stalin in Moscow. Although no abrupt changes in Shaw's politi-
cal philoSOphy occurred in that year, Shaw's praise of com-
munism became more frequent after his brief Russian trip. For
these reasons 1931 appears to be a_reasonable closing date for
this period and for the Opening of the next.
The final years of Shaw's life will be dealt with in
.
bo' ‘
os- ...
8“
in --
u
use: -n
.
I. 0"
:w-
..
u
.
.‘I. _
‘-:I
‘ v
'- h
M. ‘v-
A“.
s
' V
4
"Years of Homage and of Decline." Major writing is limited,
but he was the center of much attention. Even though there
was increased disagreement with his point of view, his re-
marks received wide publicity. Thus, since there appears to
be both a change in his point of View and in the reception
of it, this period is separated from the one before it.
While another writer might select other ways in which
to present biographical and historical material, these divi-
sions appear to be most satisfactory for understanding Shaw
the speaker and his environment.
Years of Youth in Ireland
Life for the average Irishman in the middle of the
nineteenth century was one of dreary poverty. The famine of
the forties led thousands to migrate to the United States;
many others died of starvation. The insurrection by the Irish
in Tipperary in 1848 to rid themselves of British control
failed, and life in Ireland continued to follow the unhappy
pattern which has been described by one writer as follows:
Most of the large Irish estates were owned by absentee
English landlords who hardly ever visited Ireland,
except for the shooting once a year. They found it
more comfortable to live in England, or to travel
abroad, and left it to a ruthless bailiff or agent
to collect high rents from peasants Who were ab—
solutely dependent on the land for a bare livelihood.
The peasants had no security of tenure; they were not
allowed to own their farms and holdings. As their
agricultural implements were still primitive and they
knew little of proper husbandry or the planned rota-
5
tion of crOps, the potato harvest--which gave twice
the food yield of wheat--was their staple of life.
If that failed, starvation followed. . . . If they
fell into long arrears of rent they were evicted
from their cabinS-—rendered homeless as well as
hungry.l
Conditions in the city were not much better. Those
Who were able to find employment as domestics were assured,
of course, of Shelter and food of some description. Also,
there were those who were able to earn a satisfactory living
in the retail trade. Even with these advantages, however,
life was little better, by and large, for the city dweller
than for the peasant. James Joyce's description of Dublin
of this period, for example, is well-known; and in later years,
When questioned about the accuracy of Joyce's description,
Shaw wrote:
James Joyce in his Ulysses has described, with a
fidelity so ruthless that the book is hardly bear-
able, the life that Dublin offers to its young men,
or, if you prefer to put it the other way, that its
young men offer to Dublin. No doubt it is much like
the life of young men everywhere in modern urban
civilization. A certain flippant futile derision
and belittlement that confuses the noble and serious
with the base and ludicrous seems to be peculiar to
Dublin. . . . To this day my sentimental regard for
Ireland does not include the capital. I am not
enamored of failure, of poverty, of obscurity, and
of the ostracism and contempt which these imply. . .
lJanet Dunbar, Mrs. G. B. S.: A Portrait (New York:
Harper & Row, Publishers, 1963), pp. 15—16.
2Bernard Shaw, "Preface to Immaturity," Prefaces
(London: Odhams Press Limited, 1938), pp. 673-74.
.,
...-)
Qty-
~-. .;
a w
oo_..~.
'- ...
n
‘n.
. v.
" »..
'wn
"e‘ ‘
Q
a
f
I"
l
I"
«D
(u
n-
5“
(n
1
6
The impoverished Irishman found two aspects of his
life, other than his miserable condition, particularly gall-
ing: he could not vote, and he could not own land. Further-
more, though he was Catholic, he had to support the Estab-
lished Church. His social status, too, was the antithesis
of that of members of the Protestant Ascendancy--the decendants
of the Englishmen who had been given land for supporting the
Government in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. All
forces combined to keep Ireland in a ferment for over a cen-
tury and to plague Parliament as "The Irish Question" for
decades.
In this land, but not of these peOple, George Bernard
Shaw was born in Dublin on July 26, 1856. An English-born
ancestor, William Shaw, who had been granted land in Ireland
by William III for fighting the Irish forces of the deposed
James II migrated there in 1689. Although tracing the line-
age from William to George Bernard is not germaine to under-
standing Shaw as a speaker, one issue is of importance:
though a second cousin was a Baronet, Bernard Shaw was born
into a "poor branch" of the family. AS Shaw stated it, "I
was a downstart and the son of a downstart."l
Little is known of the boyhood and young manhood of
Bernard's father, George Carr Shaw. He came from a large
lShaw, "Preface to Immaturity," Prefaces, p. 659.
. q
.n-‘ .-
a
......U
o
..noh-r
p r-
u‘. ...».
I....-_
- ,. _
...S‘..‘
.
.e
1
\p ... ‘
'4.» U.
.
"--~~
. --.:
.
.,
n '3'
8-..l:‘
7
family and was twelve when his mother was widowed. He had
neither an inheritance nor training in a profession, but
seemed to have worked in various capacities apprOpriate to
his "family status" for short periods of time. When he was
in his thirties, he received a pension; and upon selling it,
entered into a partnership with George Clibborn in a Whole-
sale grain business. The business did not prosper and little
income was left to the family by the 1870's.
In 1852 George Carr Shaw, 38, married Lucinda Eliza-
beth Gurley, 22. Lucinda was nine when her mother died; her
father sent her to her thirty-seven-year-old Aunt Ellen Whitcroft
to be brought up as a "prOper Irish gentlewoman." She was
taught music, French, and how to behave in society. "Of
hygienics, simple sanitation, knowledge of foods and prOper
nourishment, of the usages of money, or parenthood or, in
fact, of any subject that could be taken care of by any member
of any craft, profession or occupation—-that is to say, any
solicitor, nurse, servant or parent--Lucinda heard no word."
Furthermore, Aunt Ellen ruled with an iron hand. Bernard
Shaw wrote that Aunt Ellen's treatment of his mother had ". . .
unkind parts of it that could be avoided; and among these were
the constraints and tyrannies, the scoldings and browbeatings
Â¥
1 . .
B. C. Rosset, Shaw of Dublin/The Formative Years
(University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State Uni-
versity Press, 1964), p. 23.
'-~
(I.
... u
c
.—
.00-..
-.',_
q
71.. .:
...
h :'
"'V a.
.
u,‘ .'
:.
:‘m.-.
‘I ‘ .
, A
-_
.‘-
â€:1:
n
I v"
v“‘
‘9
..
">4 O
. u
'a
u
y.
u
'0
N
o
u . .
..‘::
,-
O I
v. :C
-
“c
it
.
... b:
h“ I
.
.' :-
I,‘
§"
‘._'- v
.
h
. .
.Il h
b. a
. .
"‘A
.3 ~
8
and punishments She had suffered in her childhood as the method
of her education."1
Lucinda's family did not look favorably upon her mar-
riage to George Carr Shaw. They pointed to his heavy drink-
ing2 and lack of steady income. Whether to escape from Aunt
Ellen's harsh regime or in reaction to her widowed father's
marriage to a young bride, Lucinda went ahead with the mar-
riage--which also resulted in her being disinherited by Aunt
Ellen. Mr. Gurley‘s second marriage also had an effect on
the amount whiCh Lucinda could expect later from her father,
but she did eventually receive a small annuity from her
grandfather.
Three children were born of the union of George Carr
and Lucinda Gurley Shaw: Lucinda Frances (Lucy), Elinor
Agnes, and George Bernard.3 The household in which Bernard
Bernard Shaw, Preface to London Music in 1888-89 As
Heard bycxmno di Bassetto (Later Known a§_Bernard Shaw) with
Some Further Autobioqrgphical Particulars. (New York: Dodd,
Mead & Company, 1937), p. 5.
Several sources report that the revelation of George
Carr's excessive drinking came as a surprise to Lucinda dur-
ing the honeymoon. Rosset in Shaw of Dublin, pp. 28-29; 55-
56, presents contradictory evidence.
3Rosset in Shaw of Dublin devotes a large portion of
his book to questioning whether George Carr was the father
of Bernard. He admits the evidence is inconclusive but main-
tains that Shaw's concern with certain aspects of parentage
found throughout his writings stems from Shaw's unstated un-
certainty about his own parentage. No other biographers seem
to have considered this possibility, and this study will follow
the point of view of the majority. Although conclusions drawn
7by Rosset are tenuous, his extensive research makes his book a
‘Valuable source of information about Shaw's early years.
A .
.95-
s
h-
I
\
9
Shaw was reared merits examination for the bearing it seemed
to have in the develOpment of his attitudes and points of View.
Shaw described one characteristic of his childhood
in numerous essays: life in a household in which the chil-
dnï¬lwere practically ignored by their parents. Lucinda Shaw,
especially, perhaps as a result of her upbringing, paid little
attention to her children, most of her time being devoted to
her music and to her singing lessons. This interest of
Lucinda's led eventually to the addition of another member to
the household: George John Vandeleur Lee, a teacher of music.
The arrangements eased the financial stresses of the Shaw
household.l
While Lucinda Shaw was busy with her music, the rear-
ing of the children, such as it was, was left to the servants.2
One passage by Shaw merits inclusion at length not only for
the description it gives of his childhood but also because
of the bearing which the incidents have on his attitudes of
later life.
We children (I had two sisters older than myself
and no brothers) were abandoned entirely to the
lThe platonic nature of the menage §_trois has been
described by biographers and by Shaw himself. This unique
family situation, along with a questioning Whether the situ—
ation was entirely platonic, as intimated in the footnote
immediately preceding, receives fullest treatment by Rosset.
2Lest this be taken as a contradiction that the Shaw
household was comparatively poor, it Should be remembered
that full-time servants were available then for about seventy-
five cents weekly.
lO
servants, who, with the exception of Nurse Williams,
who was a good and honest woman, were utterly unfit
to be trusted with the charge of three cats, much
less three children. I had my meals in the kitchen,
mostly of stewed beef, which I loathed, badly cooked
potatoes, sound or diseased as the case might be,
and much too much tea out of brown delft teapots left
to "draw" on the hob until it was pure tannin. Sugar
I stole. I was never hungry, because my father, often
insufficiently fed in his childhood, had such a horror
of child hunger that he insisted on unlimited bread
and butter being always within our reach. When I was
troublesome a servant thumped me on the head until one
day, greatly daring, I rebelled, and, on finding her
collapse abjectly, became thenceforth uncontrollable. . . .
My ordinary exercise whilst I was still too young
to be allowed out by myself was to be taken out by a
servant, who was supposed to air me on the banks of
the canal or round the fashionable squares where the
atmosphere was esteemed salubrious and the surround-
ings gentlemanly. Actually She took me into the Slums
to visit her private friends, who dwelt in squalid
tenements. When she met a generous male acquaintance
who insisted on treating her she took me into the
public house bars, where I was regaled with lemonade
and gingerbeer. . . . Thus were laid the foundations
of my lifelong hatred of poverty, and the devotion
of all my public life to the task of exterminating
the poor and rendering their resurrection for ever
impossible.l
Shaw described a number of incidents in which his
father played a part and, in particular, pointed to his
father's sense of humor. A disturbing element, however, was
Bernard's discovery that though his father was a teetotaler
in principle, he was a drunkard in practice. Shaw described
what occurred after his father pretended to throw him in the
canal.
When we got home I said to my mother as an awful and
hardly credible discovery "Mamma: I think Papa is
1Shaw, preface to London Music in 1888-89, pp. 11-12.
'-..
ll
drunk." This was too much for her. She replied
"When is he anything else?"
It is a rhetorical exaggeration to say that
I have never since believed in anything or anybody;
but the wrench from my childish faith in my father
as perfect and omniscient to the discovery that he
was a hypocrite and dipsomaniac was so sudden and
violent that it must have left its mark on me.1
As mentioned earlier, the Shaws were of the Protestant
Ascendancy in Ireland; and Bernard attended the Established
Church and Sunday school for a time. "Both in church and at
Sunday school he was taught to believe that God was a Protestant
and a gentleman and that all Roman Catholics went to hell when
they died, neither of which beliefs placed the Almighty in a
_ 2 .
very favourable light." At home, of course, he received a
different point of View on the matter from the Irish Catholic
servants. In all, however, Shaw's religious training as a
youth was Sketchy, and his church-going came to an end by the
time he was ten. His father was comparatively indifferent
to religion, his mother was determined to spare her children
"the pious horrors" of her own youth, and he himself was re-
. 3
acting to the Sheer boredom of his church experiences. Al-
though formal church—going lasted a Short time, attitudes
towards going to church were expressed many times by Shaw
throughout his life.
1Bernard Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches (New York:
Dodd, Mead & Company, 1949), pp. 27-28.
2Pearson, A Full Length Portrait, p. 9.
3
Pearson, A Full Length Portrait, p. 10.
12
Earlier also, it was pointed out that members of the
Protestant Ascendancy had a social status above that of the
Irish Catholics. The Shaws were of the "Gentleman" class--
George Carr eschewed certain labors because they were be-
neath his status--but did not have the wealth associated
with “Gentlemen." A description of this phenomenon as well as
its implications for subsequent effects on Shaw's political
point of view is evident in the following lengthy passage by
Shaw :
One evening I was playing on the street with a
schoolfellow of mine, when my father came home. He
questioned me about this boy, who was the son of a
prosperous ironmonger. The feelings of my father,
who was not prosperous and who sold flour by the
sack, when he learned that his son had played on
the public street with the son of a man who Sold
nails by the pennyworth in a Shop are not to be
described. He impressed on me that my honour, my
self-respect, my human dignity, all stood upon my
determination not to associate with persons engaged
in retail trade. Probably this was the worst crime
my father ever committed. And yet I do not see what
else he could have taught me, Short of genuine re-
publicanism, which is the only possible school of
good manners.
Imagine being taught to despise a workman, and
to respect a gentleman, in a country where every
rag of excuse for gentility is stripped off by
poverty! Imagine being taught that there is one
God--a Protestant and a perfect gentleman--keeping
heaven select for the gentry; and an idolatrous
impostor called the POpe, smoothing the hellward
way for the mass of the peOple, only admissible
into the kitchens of most of the aforesaid gentry
as “thorough servants" (general servants) at18 a
year! Imagine the pretensions of the English peer-
age on the incomes of the English lower middle-
class! I remember StOpford Brooke one day telling
me that he discerned in my books an intense and
13
contemptuous hatred for society. No wonder!-—
though, like him, I strongly demure to the usurpa-
tion of the word "society" by an unsocial system
of setting class against class and creed against
creed.l
Even though Bernard Shaw had many aunts and uncles
and descriptions of them are sprinkled throughout Shavian
essays, visiting among the George Carr Shaws and other Shaws
dwindled considerably during young Bernard's boyhood. George
Carr's excessive drinking seems to have been the chief cause
for this, although the unconventional Lucinda, who counted
- her music teacher a member of the household and did not hesi-
tate to Sing with Roman Catholics if She thereby had a chance
to perform, may have contributed to the attitude of the Shaw
clan.2
A maternal uncle, a ship's surgeon, Visited the Shaw
household fairly often. Although Shaw made numerous refer-
ences to his father's sense of humor and to the other members
of the Shaw clan to which he could attribute his own sense of
ridiculous, some of Bernard's wit and perhaps his style of
expression in general might be traced to his mother's brother.
He described his Uncle Walter as follows:
1Bernard Shaw, "In the Days of My Youth," Mainly
About People (London, September 17, 1898). Reproduced in
The Living Age, CCCXXXIV (1924), 323 ff. Cited in Henderson,
Man of the Century, pp. 15-16.
2Rosset, pp. 111 ff.
14
His profanity and obscenity in conversation
were of Rabelasian exhuberance; and as to the
maxima reverentia due to my tender years, he had
rather less of it, if possible, than Falstaff had
for Prince Hal. To the half dozen childish rhymes
taught me by my mother he added a stock of unprint-
able limericks that constituted almost an education
in geography. He was always in high Spirits, and
full of a humor that, though barbarous in its blas-
phemous indecency, was Scriptural and Shakespearean
in the elaboration and fantasy of its literary ex-
pression. Being full of the Bible, he quoted the
sayings of Jesus as models of facetious repartee
. . . . He was a scoffer and a rake. . ."1
Shaw's early education was in the hands of govern-
esses, who taught him reading and the basics of arithmetic.
"I cannot remember learning to read; but I do remember a wet
afternoon on the quays When I sheltered with my father in a
portico plastered with posters, and being small enough to be
carried in his arms, electrified the crowd by reading all
2
the posters aloud."
His reading was encouraged by his father, who knew
Scott's novels, although Shaw reported that he never saw his
father with a book. One incident which illustrates his
father's interest is perhaps the forerunner of Shaw's life-
long concern with articulation and pronunciation: "One of
my very earliest recollections is reading the Pilgrim's Prog-
ress to him, and being corrected by him for saying grievious
instead of grievous.“
l
2
Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, pp. 32-33.
Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 167.
3Shaw, "Preface to Immaturity," Prefaces, p. 666.
15
Shaw apparently followed his father's advice about
reading. Books that he reportedly read in his youth include
fairy tales when he was very young, Robinson Crusoe, Swiss
Family Robinson, the afore—mentioned Pilgrim's Progress, The
Arabian Nights, Great Expectations, A Tale of Two Cities,
Little Dorrit, Pickwick, Bleak House, and other novels by
Dickens. The Ancient Mariner, the works of Mark Twain, and
the poetry of Shelley were familiar to him. Above all, how-
ever, he was "saturated" with the Bible and with the works
of Shakespeare. Shaw also reported that as a youth he read
Mill on Liberty, on Representative Government, and on the
Irish Land Question.l Even though this list is imposing and
appears to be rather heavy reading for a young boy, it Should
be pointed out that he also read less weighty material. Rosset
consulted the reminiscences of a boyhood friend of Shaw's,
Matthew Edward McNulty--with whom Shaw continued a correspond-
ence until McNulty's death-—and described this side of young
Shaw:
While Shaw in his later years someWhat pointedly
illustrated his own youthful prodigy by listing his
awesomely-mature taste in literature, McNulty's ac-
count had it that it was not always so discriminat-
ing. They were, he wrote, "not by any means a pair
of juvenile prigs" and announced that their favorite
reading matter was, in fact, The Boys of England,
which, he said, was the first paper for boys ever to
be published and was founded by one Edwin J. Brett.
1
Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 95.
t"
16
He remembered the first serial they read which was
called Alone in the Pirates's Lair, or The Adven-
tures of Jack Harkaway. So enthralled were the
lads with these stories that they could hardly
wait from week to week for the next installment
and would, in the interim, discuss seriously Hark—
away'S current dilemma and devise schemes for his
extrication. They hated the pirates and swore
that when they were grown up, they would shoot all
pirates on Sight.
One other important facet of Shaw's home education
should be pointed out--his musical education. That Lee, a
music teacher, was a member of the household and that his
mother was an avid student of singing has already been
pointed out. Moreover, Shaw gave extensive credit for his
ability to develOp and maintain an excellent voice quality
to "The Method" which was taught by Lee. This method, later
taught also by Shaw's mother, concentrated upon the function
of the larynx, which apparently enabled a singer or speaker
to minimize the effect of age on vocal quality. Thus in his
boyhood he was surrounded by musical interests in general
and by the vocal techniques taught by Lee in particular.
While Shaw was not given music lessons—-Lee concentrated
on Lucinda and her daughter Lucy, Shaw taught himself to play
the piano and sang from the musical scores that seemingly
filled the house. "I could Sing and whistle from end to end
leading works by Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Rossini,
. . . . . 2
IBellini, Donizetti and Verdi."
lRosset, p. 199.
2Shaw, Preface to London Music in 1888-89, p. 13.
I.
.0.
p.
A\'
A h
-\V
17
Although Shaw wrote repeatedly of the neglect by his
parents during his childhood, they did make arrangements for
some formal schooling for their son. Following early lessons
in Latin from an uncle, William George Carroll, Shaw entered
Wesleyan Connexional School for a few months in 1865, then
re-entered in 1867, thus being there a total of about fifteen
months.1 Then, in 1869 he was enrolled in Central Model Boys'
School. This school was especially abhorrenttx>Shaw. It was
"undenominational and classless in theory but in fact Roman
Catholic, where the boys whose parents could afford it brought
five Shillings to school periodically, and were caned in the
Wesleyan manner if they failed."2 Shaw later reported that
this episode was "formerly so repugnant to me that for 80
years I never mentioned it to any mortal creature, not even
to my wife."3 Then, from 1869 to 1871, Shaw attended Dublin
English Scientific and Commercial Day School.
School records pertaining to Shaw are sketchy. Even
though occasional reports Show he was capable of good work,
he did not distinguish himself. Furthermore, although young
Shaw was not interested in Sports, he got into the usual
scrapes of young boys.
lRosset, pp. 178-79.
2Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 42.
3Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 39. For a discus-
sion of a contrary point of View, see Rosset, pp. 183 ff.
ah.
nu-
AK.
._
a -
ns~
yin
18
Not only do school records Show that Shaw was not out-
standing as a scholar, but he claims he learned nothing in
school. An explanation of sorts of this attitude toward
school is found in his remark, "I cannot learn anything that
does not interest me. My memory is not indiscriminate: it
. . . . l
rejects and selects; and its selections are not academic."
Throughout his life Shaw was critical of formal education and
looked upon his own experiences as an unhappy period of his
life. He was critical of what was taught and how it was
taught.
There was only one method of teaching. Instead of
the pupil asking, and the teacher answering and ex—
plaining, the teacher asked the questions. If the
pupil could not give the book answer, he received
a bad mark, and at the end of the week expiated it
by suffering not more than Six "tips" (slaps across
the palm with a cane) which did not hurt sufficiently
to do more than convince me that corporal punishment,
to be effective, must be cruel.
Various reasons, from disinterest to need for help
with family finances, have been given for Shaw's leaving
3
school at the age of fifteen. Although the causes for Shaw's
undertaking his first job are somewhat hazy, this action on
Bernard's part occurred shortly after Lee went to London to
teach music. Further, Bernard and his father soon moved to
a rooming house when Lucinda and her daughters also left for
England.
1Shaw, â€Preface to Immaturity," Prefaces, p. 671.
2Shaw, Sixteen_§elf Sketches, p. 41.
3See discussion in Rosset, pp. 217 ff.
u.
b.
A :3
A H
19
Young Shaw's first job, which a relative helped him
obtain, was as an office boy at eighteen shillings a month
for Uniacke Townshend and Company, estate agents. When
within a year the cashier in the office absconded with some
company funds, Shaw was asked to fill in and do the man's
work. Although Shaw's salary increased to reflect his new
responsibilities, he was never "officially" made the cashier.
His duties, Shaw reported, included
the receipt and payment of the rents, charges, in-
surances, private debts, etc., on many estates,
with occasional trips to the country to collect
rents. My employers acted also as private bankers
and, to a certain extent, confidential agents to
their clients, and hence I became accustomed to
handling large sums of money, meeting men of all
conditions, and getting glimpses of country house
life behind the scenes.
Shaw handled his work well, and by 1876 his salary
was {70 or ‘80. Dissatisfied with the nature of his work,
however, he submitted his resignation and left for London.
Two reported incidents which occurred during his em-
ployment in the real estate office merit inclusion in a study
of Shaw as a public Speaker. One took place in the land
office, where most of the young employees were university
graduates. Discussions arose in Which Shaw took part, many
of them, incidentally, about religion.
Arguments arose in which I being young and untrained
in dialectic, got severely battered. "What is the
l
Cited in Rattray, p. 24.
20
use," said Humphrey Lloyd (an apprentice), "of
arguing when you dont know what a syllogism is?"
I went to the dictionary and found out what it
was, learning like Moliere's bourgeois hero,
that I had been syllogizing all my life without
knowing it.1
The other incident occurred in 1875, when revivalists
Dwight Moody and Ira Sankey visited Dublin. Shaw attended
and wrote a letter to Public Opinion-—his first published
"letter to the editorâ€--and a letter of interest to this study
because it contains his first recorded comments on public
speaking.
Sir,--In reply to your correspondent, "J. R. D.," as
to the effect of the "wave of evangelism", I beg to
offer the following observations on the late "revival"
in Dublin, of which I was a witness.
As the enormous audiencesdrawn to the evangelistic
services have been referred to as a proof of their
efficacy, I will enumerate some of the motives which
induce many persons to go. It will be seen that they
were not of a religious, but a secular, not to say
profane, character.
Predominant was the curiosity excited by the great
reputation of the evangelists, and the stories, widely
circulated, of the summary annihilation by epilepsy
and otherwise of sceptics who had Openly proclaimed
their doubts of Mr Moody's divine mission.
Another motive exhibits a peculiar Side of human
nature. The service took place in the Exhibition
building, the entry to which was connected in the
public mind with the expenditure of a certain sum
Of money. But Messrs Moody and Sankey Opened the
building "for nothing“, and the novelty, combined
with the curiosity, made the attraction irresistible.
I mention these influences particularly as I be-
lieve they have hitherto been ignored. The audiences
were, as a rule, respectable; and as Mr Moody's ora-
tionS were characterised by an excess of vehement
assertion and a total lack of logic, respectable
1
Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 56.
21
audiences were precisely those which were least likely
to derive any benefit from them.
It is to the rough, to the outcast of the streets,
that such "awakenings" Should be addressed; and those
members of the aristocracy who by their presense tend
to raise the meetings above the sphere of such out-
casts, are merely diverting the evangelistic vein in-
to channels where it is wasted, its place being already
supplied, and as in the dull routine of hard work,
novelty has a special attraction for the poor, I think
it would be well for clergymen, who are nothing if
not conspicuous, to render themselves so in this in-
stance by their absence.
The unreasoning mind of the peOple is too apt to
connect a white tie with a dreary church service,
capped by a sermon of platitudes, and is more likely
to appreciate "the gift of the gab"--the possession
of which by Mr Moody nobody will deny--than that of
the Apostolic Succession, Which he lacks.
Respecting the effect Of the revival on individuals
I may mention that it has a tendency to make them
highly objectionable members Of society and induces
their unconverted friends to desire a Speedy reaction,
which either soon takes place or the revived one
relapses slowly into his previous benighted condi-
tion as the effect fades, and although many young
men have been snatched from careers of dissipation
by Mr Moody's exhortations, it remains doubtful
whether the change is not merely in the nature of
the excitement rather than in the moral natures of
the individual. HOping that these remarks may eluci-
date further Opinions on the subject,
I remain, Sir, yours, etc.
1
DUBLIN
It was only about a year after writing this letter,
and a few months before his twentieth birthday, that Shaw
sailed for England, where his public speaking career developed
far beyond that suggested by his first published criticism.
1
Cited in Ervine, pp. 52-53.
‘c -v
'0'.
in.
...:
“‘AA.
....“
I.
â€...;
.
....
"u.
'“u.
Pm. h
w.
z...
‘0‘.
vi
a "u
l..
b
{.4
(D
22
‘Xeappgof_gabian Socialism and_§§say_Writipg
When Bernard Shaw arrived in London in April, 1876,
Disraeli was Prime Minister of England. That same month
Queen Victoria was declared Empress Of India; since shares
in the Suez Canal had been purchased a few months before,
Great Britain soon would have full control of that waterway:
the British Empire circled the globe.
Imperialism caused difficulties, it is true: uprising
occurred in India; battles were yet to be fought in Egypt;
South African colonization would lead to the Boer War. But
since 1815 Britain had been involved in no major wars with
other powers (if one discounts the short-lived and poorly-
fought Crimean War) and would not be for a number of years to
come. 'By 1876 British expansion abroad was approaching its
zenith, and internal conditions were beginning to be the focal
point of Parliamentary concern.
"The Irish Question" continued to plague the British.
The Irish Reform Bill of 1868 and the Ballot Act of 1872,
which provided for the secret ballot, removed the agitation
for franchise as a major issue in Ireland. The land problem
was still a major issue, however; and the Irish bloc in Par-
liament under Parnell was a force to be reckoned with. With
representation by Tories and Liberals nearly equal, Parnell
was in a position to bargain with those Who would give the
most concessions to the Irish. The power Of the bloc was not
ll!
Q .
b—
o:-
0..
...
.n
23
sufficient, of course, to win Ireland the much-coveted Home
Rule.
Despite the problems with Ireland and periodic diffi-
culties in the Empire, the average middle—class Englishman of
the middle third of the century was pleased with his lot. The
Reform Bills of 1832 and 1867 had given him the franchise.
Hard work and the "right†moral attitude, he believed, guar-
anteed success. The prevalent economic philoSOphy was laissez
faire. Based primarily on subtle arguments devised by Ricardo
and Malthus, the theory was over-Simplified in industrial
England to mean that economic problems should be allowed to
work themselves out by "natural laws." This point of view,
held by the Liberal Party, meant support of free trade and
Opposition to control of wages, hours of labor, working condi-
tions, and so on. The middle class attitude of individual
initiative received impetus from a surprising source: Darwin's
The Origin of the Species, published in 1859. His concept Of
"the survival Of the fittest" assured the middle class English-
man that his belief in the direct relationship of hard work
to success was correct.
Even though many affluent Englishmen held this point
of view, the rumblings of the discontented working class had
not been entirely ignored by Parliament. Some reforms had
been passed by 1876, the year of Shaw's arrival in London:
the Education Bill of 1870 and a bill reforming the civil
Art
n‘.
.—u
an-
oo .
cu.
.
U4.
is
24
service under the first Gladstone ministry; and the Public
Health Act and the Artisans' Dwelling Act in 1875 during the
second Disraeli ministry. None of these, however, had much
effect on the real conditions of the working man of the last
quarter of the nineteenth century. A more detailed descrip-
tion of the workingman's lot is in order, however, since
Shaw's Socialist Speeches were concerned with this segment
of late Victorian England.
In this period under discussion, England was beset
by a severe economic depression, caused by a complexity of
factors including a drOp in world trade. The Situation was
compounded by the severe agricultural depression Of 1879, the
year of an extremely poor harvest. The lot of the agricultural
worker, already bad, became even worse. "In 1871, the census
returns classified three—fifflnsof the peOple as urban and two-
fifths as rural. By the end of Victoria's reign in 1901 more
than three—fourths were urban and less than one-fourth rural."l
This influx of agricultural workers to the cities where unem-
ployment was Often high added to the surplus labor market
there.
When the city laborer found employment, he discovered
not only that there was little job security in the depressed
1
Herman Ausubel, The Late Victorians: A Short His-
tory (New York: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1955), p.
10 .
-..
On
A.
"u
p
I
’1
'II
(I)
QA‘
P .
N
‘
25
industries but also that his wage rate might be cut with
little or no warning. Moreover, he had to work long hours
to earn a living; and the average work week in 1870 was sixty
hours, although by the turn Of the century this dropped to
about fifty-four.l Furthermore, sanitary conditions were
poor, and the worker had little protection against industrial
accidents until legislation was passed in the course of the
period under discussion. Child labor under unbelievable
conditions was common. Thus the laborer's situation was
further aggravated by lack Of security, low wages and periodic
wage reductions, long hours, and poor working conditions.
The worst conditions by far were those of "sweating,"
a system in Which manufacturers would contract "sweaters,"
who in turn doled out menial and back-breaking tasks for
workers to complete at low piece rates at home. If the
workers complained of wages, there were always others need-
ing the tiny income and willing to do the work. An example
of this group of laborers is that of the "hair pullers," who
pulled coarse hairs from rabbit Skins and separated the soft
down next to the skin. A writer of the day described "sweat-
ing" in detail; a portion of it is included here because of
the graphic description it gives of a condition which pre-
vailed in the nineteenth century.
lAusubel, p. 29.
26
. . .In an endless network of pestilential courts
and alleys, into which can penetrate no pure,
purging breath of heaven, where the plants languish
and die in the heavy air, and the very flies seem
to lose the power of flight and creep and crawl in
sickly, loathsome adhesion to mouldering walls and
ceilings—-here. . . we find the miserable poverty-
stricken rooms of the fur-pullers. . . .
The room is barely eight feet square, even less,
because of its accumulation of dirt; and it has to
serve for day and night alike. Pushed into one
corner is the bed, a dirty pallet tied together with
string, upon which is piled a black heap of bed-
clothes. On one half of the table are the remains
of breakfast--a crust Of bread, a piece of butter,
and a cracked cup, all thickly coated with the all-
pervading hairs. The other half is covered with
pulled skins, waiting to be taken into 'ShOp.‘ The
window is tightly closed, because such air as can
find its way in from the stifling court below would
force the hairs into the noses and eyes and lungs
Of the workers, and make life more intolerable for
them than it already is. To the visitor, indeed,
the choking sensation caused by the passage of the
hairs into the throat, and the nausea from the smell
Of the Skins, is at first almost too overpowering
for Speech.
The two prematurely aged women-—whose unkempt,
matted hair is almost hidden under a thick covering
of fluff, and whose clothing is of the scantiest,
seeming to consist Of bits of sacking fashioned into
some semblance of garments--are sitting on low stools
before a roughly made deal through, into which they
throw the long upper hairs of the Skin, reducing
them to the fine, silky down growing next to the
skin itself, which is afterwards manufactured into
felt hats. . . .
What do they get for it? They say each of them
can pull 'a turn and a half' working twelve hours.
A 'turn' means sixty skins; and the rate of pay is
11 g,per turn--l g, 4% g, for the twelve hours. . . .
The women provide their own plucking knives and the
Shields for their hands. . . .1
1Edith F. Hogg, "The Fur-pullers of South London"
(November, 1897), Nineteenth-Century Opinion, comp. and ed.
Michael Goodwin (Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books,
1951). pp. 19-22 .
...-
_..u
...:-
cub
0‘
0
up
0
o.
9..
‘v-«
- -
u..y
..-
lll
(Y)
v.
‘0‘
11‘
27
Situations such as these were the target of many Socialists,
including Shaw.
While Socialists were among the most vehement indi-
viduals decrying such conditions, those holding the laissez
faire attitude described earlier in this paper did not deny
that the condition of the poor was deplorable. Sharp differ-
ences arose over the cause and cure of poverty, however. Men
Of business and industry pointed to depressed economic condi-
tions as a cause of low wages. Some felt the workers them-
selves were often at fault.
For a great deal of it they have themselves been
directly and exclusively responsible. Work has
been deplorably scarce, but they have made it,
by their own voluntary action, far scarcer than
it would otherwise have been. In many instances
masters have been ruined and their works unavoid-
ably closed and the men they employed have been
thrown upon their own resources, and not infre-
quently reduced to destitution, by no fault of
their own. But in many other instances the men
have voluntarily thrown themselves out of work
by refusing to accept it at the reduced rate of
wages which was all their impoverished employers
could afford to Offer them. They deliberately
deprived themselves of employment, and their
consequent privations, however severe, were en-
tirely gratuitous.
Herbert Spencer was even more pointed in blaming the poor for
their own condition.
As far as he was concerned, the poor deserved, for
the most part, to be poor. The authors of their
own misery, they were paying the price of their
1W. R. Greg, "A Grave Perplexity Before Us" (March,
1879), Nineteenth—Century Opinion, ed. Goodwin, p. 68.
“‘u :-
V's-i
to.
.-
uh~
II.
a
\
V
v
f‘
V:
28
misconduct-~their refusal to work or to hold on to
a job. Spencer regarded them simply as good-for-
nothings whose main ambition was to live at the
expense of the good—for—somethings. To Spencer it
was absurd for peOple to think that all hardships
either could or should be prevented. He viewed
suffering as a cure that would encourage the poor
to help themselves.1
Although many individuals expressed the point of view
that the poor had only themselves to blame for their wretched
condition, the intent of these descriptions is not to condemn
any one segment of Victorian society, nor to elicit sympathy
for the causes which Shaw espoused. Furthermore, the Socialists
‘were not the only ones attempting to rectify conditions which
existed during this time; reforms Which were instituted in
England during the last decades of the century and later were
the results of the efforts of many. Brief as this foregoing
description is, however, it indicates the conditions and
attitudes Shaw was to find and attack in London.
Upon his arrival there, Shaw went directly to Victoria
Grove, Where his mother and sister Lucy were living--his
younger sister had recently died. He found that the financial
conditions of his family was precarious: Lucinda received a
small amount regularly from her grandfather's estate, George
Carr sent about a pound a week to his family, and Lucinda
had a few music students which helped a little in meeting ex-
penses. Lucy was studying voice, hOping for a career in
1Ausubel, p. 45.
29
concert Singing.
After taking a little time to become acquainted with
London, Shaw began looking for employment and took a civil
service "cram course" in the summer of 1876. He did not find
any employment to Speak of, however, until 1879, when he went
to work for the Edison Telephone Company of London. Although
he was a Showroom demonstrator at one point, Shaw's primary
work, on a commission basis, was persuading the people of
London to allow the phone company to erect poles and other
structures on their prOperty. In 1880 the company merged
with Bell Telephone, and all employees were released. Even
though all of them were given the Opportunity to reapply
and were promised every consideration in employment, Shaw
did not choose to continue with the phone company. He later
wrote:
This was the end Of my career as a commercial
employee. I soon drOpped even the pretence Of
seeking any renewal of it. Except for a day or
two in 1881, when I earned a few pounds by count-
ing votes at an election in Leyton, I was an
Unemployable, an ablebodied pauper in fact if
not in law, until the year 1885, when for the
first time I earned enough money directly by
my pen to pay my way. . . . My penury phase
was over.
Although Shaw was unemployed much of the time after
his arrival in London, he was not idle. For one thing, he
began writing. He ghosted some music reviews and a pamphlet,
lShaw, "Preface to Immaturity," Prefaces, pp. 675-76.
30
How to Cure Clergyman's Sore Throat, for Lee; and under his
own name he wrote magazine articles and earned a little money
with those he was able to sell. His most ambitions literary
undertakings, however, were his novels: in 1879 he wrote his
first novel, Immaturity, and followed that with another novel
each year for the next four years. Publishers returned his
submitted manuscripts, however, and the novels were not pub-
lished in book form till years later. As noted above, it
wasn't until 1885 that he began to earn his living by writing.
Shaw also utilized his time by studying. He continued
with his music education, studying harmony and counterpoint.
He sometimes served as accompanist at musical functions in
which his mother was involved. He visited art galleries.
Most important to this study, he was a regular visitor at the
British Museum. He "taught himself" French, studied shorthand
and phonetics, investigated physics, reading Tyndall and
Helmholtz. More will be said Of his extensive reading later,
but at this point an event which occurred in 1879 Should be
described.
During his early years in London, Shaw met James
Lecky, whom he described as an "exchequer clerk from Ireland,
and privately interested in phonetics, keyboard temperament,
1
and Gaelic, all of which subjects he imposed on me." Lecky
lShaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 93.
31
persuaded Shaw to go with him to a meeting of the Zetetical
Society in the winter of 1879, and at that point began that
phase Of Shaw's life which is of prime interest to this study.
Years later Shaw wrote of the event:
When I went with Lecky to the Zetetical meeting
I had never spoken in public. I knew nothing about
public meetings or their order. I had an air of
impudence, but was really an arrant coward, nervous
and self-conscious to a heartbreaking degree. Yet
I could not hold my tongue. I started up and said
something in the debate, and then, feeling that I
had made a fool of myself, as in fact I had, I was
so ashamed that I vowed I would join the Society;
go every week; speak in every debate; and become
a speaker or perish in the attempt. I carried out
this resolution.1
Twenty-three-year-old Bernard Shaw then began to carry
out that resolution tO become a public Speaker.
I persevered doggedly. I haunted all the meet-
ings in London Where debates followed lectures.
I spoke in the streets, in the parks, at demonstra-
tions, anywhere and everywhere possible. In short,
I infested public meetings like an Officer afflicted
with cowardice, who takes every Opportunity of going
under fire to get over it and learn his business.
He had little difficulty in finding Opportunities to speak,
for at that time in England there were numerous societies that
debated issues of the day. "For decades The Times was filled
with announcements of meetings. . . . Science, religion, art,
literature, history, politics, the living habits of the masto-
don, and the legislative powers of Anglican convocation--
1Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 94.
2
Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, pp. 95-96.
32
everything was debatable."l
A common format of the societies was to have a speaker
lecture, then allow members of the audience to question the
Speaker or present Opposing arguments on his subject. When
he attended such meetings, Shaw Often sent a note to the
chairman's desk with the notation, "Mr. Bernard Shaw would
like to ask a question." In the early days Of Shaw's attend-
ance at such meetings, the chairman usually had not the vaguest
notion who Bernard Shaw was, but called on him at the earliest
Opportunity.
Instantly Shaw would come forward and ask a question
exasperating enough to make a worm turn and a rabbit
fight. Before the smoke of the engagement had blown
away, everyone in the hall would know that the red-
headed, red-bearded stranger had demolished the
speaker of the evening, and would never forget the
name of Bernard Shaw. The result . . . was that in
a comparatively short time, among the hole-in-corner
debating societies, Bernard Shaw was the best known
man in London.
Many of these societies at which Shaw Spoke no longer
exist, nor are their names even known, but records are avail-
able Of a number of groups Shaw joined and in which he became
3
an active member. He prepared papers when asked to, but he
lWilliam Irvine, The Universe of G. B. S. (New York:
Whittlesey House, 1949), p. 36.
2Henderson, Man of the Centgpy, pp. 138-39. Shaw
denied the accuracy of this report to Pearson (G. B. S., a
Postscript, p. 23), stating, "One just got up and Spoke;
and the chairman was only too glad to have the debate kept
going. There was no fame to be got out of it."
3Shaw was a great "joiner" of groups throughout his
life but avoided joining organizations "in name only."
33
far preferred to spend his time participating in the debate
periods which followed the papers and lectures of others.
One of the first groups which Shaw joined was the
Zetetical Society, mentioned earlier in this paper. This
group, an off-shoot of the Dialectical Society, was "strongly
individualistic, atheistic, Malthusian, evolutionary, Inger-
Sollian, Darwinian, Herbert Spencerian."l The third time
he attended the Zetetical Society he was invited to take the
chair, and at a meeting in the Winter Session, 1881-82,Spoke
"On what is called 'The Sacredness of Human Life,‘ and its
bearing on the question of Capital Punishment."2 Since at
first he did not feel he had an adequate background, he spent
hours at the British Museum studying and familiarizing him—
self with subjects discussed. He seemed to realize the need
for knowledge for effective speaking and believed his one
success of that period with the Zetetical Society,
. . . was when the society paid to Art, of Which it
was stupendously ignorant, the tribute of setting
aside an evening for a paper on it by a lady in the
'aesthetic' dress of the period. I wiped the floor
with that meeting; and several members confessed to
me afterwards that it was this performance that first
made them reconsider their first impression of me as
a discordant idiot.
lShaw, letter to Henderson, January 17, 1905, cited in
Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 136.
2Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 137.
3Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 138.
34
Shaw did not limit his membership to the Zetetical
Society and the Philosophic Section of that group. Some time
in the early eighties, he joined the Dialectical Society,
originally founded to discuss John Stuart Mill. Also, he
became a member of a debating group called the Bedford,
founded by Stopford Brooke. In 1883 he joined the Browning
Society and was elected to the Executive Committee. In the
mid-eighties, also, he joined the New Shakespeare Society;
and in 1886 he became a member of the Shelley Society and
was elected to that group's Committee in 1888. Although he
did not have a burning interest in all Of the subjects
selected by the various societies, he took an active part in
the proceedings and studied assiduously the subjects upon
which the societies focused.
While the most famous group to which Shaw belonged
was, Of course, the Fabian Society, the incidents which re-
veal his growing interest in Socialism should first be des-
cribed.
Although Shaw has stated that his boyhood experiences
furnished a "fertile soil" for his Socialism, he attributes
the real impetus for his political point of view to hearing
Henry George, an American, Speak at Memorial Hall on September
5, 1882, on the nationalization of land. After George's
speech he purchased and thoroughly studied George's Progress
and Poverty, and began to attend societies which concentrated
35
on Socialist views. One such group he attended was Hyndman's
Socialist Democratic Federation. At one meeting he was
chastised for trying to speak knowingly about Socialism with-
out having read Marx. He was taken aback by the criticism,
but immediately went about remedying the situation. Since
DaS Kapital was available at the British Museum at that time
only in a French translation, the task was not an easy one.
Shaw admitted he did not understand the economic argument
completely at first, nor did he ever completely agree with
Marx; but he did become a convert, a position which influ-
enced his activities for the rest of his life. Of the in-
fluence on his apeaking Shaw said, "From that hour I was a
speaker with apgospel, no longer only an apprentice trying
to master the art of public speaking."1
Even though Shaw used every Opportunity to promote
the Socialist cause at literary societies, the various
Socialist groups provided a fertile field for his Speaking.
In addition to the S. D. F., he frequented meetings of the
Land Reform League; and he often shared the platform with
William Morris, who originally belonged to H. M. Hyndman's
Socialist Democratic Federation, then withdrew and formed
the Socialist League, and at one point tried--unsuccessfully
--to unite the various socialist groups. Shaw was a frequent
lShaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 97.
36
guest of Morris's and often Spoke at the regular Sunday
night meetings of the Hammersmith Socialist Society, a group
which seceded from the Socialist League and met in the coach
house of Morris's home, Kelmscott.
The group with which Shaw is most readily associated
first met on October 24, 1883, with Havelock Ellis to discuss
a "Fellowship of the New Life." On January 4, 1884, the group
adopted the name, "The Fabian Society," with the purpose "to
help on the reconstruction of Society in accordance with the
highest moral possibilities" and a plan which included the
presentation of papers by members. The first printed "Fabian
Tract" entitled, "Why Are the Many Poor?" contained the motto
of the Fabian Society: "For the right moment you must wait,
as Fabius did most patiently, when warring against Hannibal,
though many censured his delays; but when the time comes you
must strike hard, as Fabius did, or your waiting will be in
vain and fruitless."1
The minutes of the May 16, 1884, meeting have a pen-
cilled note in the margin: "This meeting was made memorable
by the first appearance of Bernard Shaw." Shaw became a
member of the Society on September 5, 1884, and was elected
to the Executive Committee on January 2, 1885.2 In March of
1Attempts to trace this quotation were fruitless,
but the Society decided to keep it nevertheless.
2Shaw remained on the Executive Committee until 1911,
when he resigned in favor of "younger blood."
37
that year Shaw invited Sidney Webb, whom he had met at the
Zetetical Society, to the Fabian Society, for he felt that
the association could be beneficial to all. Shaw had great
respect for Webb's ability, particularly for his analytical
and encyclopedic mind, and often gave credit to Webb for his
own development as a speaker. Shaw and Webb made a formid-
able team as Fabians, and Shaw, always generous in his praise
of his colleague, described his appreciation of Webb's con—
tributions many years later:
The difference between Shaw with Webb's brains,
knowledge, and official experience and Shaw by him—
self was enormous. But as I was and am an incor-
rigible histrionic mountebank, and Webb was the
Simplest of geniuses, I was often in the centre of
the stage whilst he was invisible in the prompter's
box.1
These two members of the Fabian Society were soon
joined by Sydney Olivier, Webb's colleague at the Colonial
Office, and by Graham Wallas, thus completing the "Big Four"
2
of Fabian thought, those who were primarily responsible
for the writing of the well-known Fabian Essays.
Although the growth and development of the Society,
along with a discussion of Shaw's contributions, are discus-
sed in detail in histories of the Fabian Society,3 a brief
lShaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 108.
2Margaret Isabel (Postgate) Cole, The Story of Fabian
Socialism (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press,
1961), pp. 7-8.
3See pp. xvi-xvii for appr0priate histories.
38
description of Shaw and his Fabian friends in the formative
years of the organization seems in order.
As was true of many Socialist groups, the early years
of the Society were marked by many disagreements among members
as they debated the issues and directions to be pursued. Al-
though other groups floundered and even dissolved due to in-
ternal disagreements, the Fabians, aided a great deal by Shaw,
managed to overcome such differences of opinion. Shaw's tech—
niques as peacemaker were unorthodox but effective; the follow-
ing comments, corroborated in other sources, reveal his pro-
cedure:
I believe that some of my own usefulness lay in
smoothing out these frictions by an Irish sort of
tact which in England seemed the most outrageous
want of it. Whenever there was a quarrel I be-
trayed everybody's confidence by analyzing it and
stating it lucidly in the most exaggerated terms.
Result: both Sides agreed that it was all my
fault. I was denounced on all hands as a reckless
mischiefmaker, but forgiven as a privileged Irish
lunatic.l
Even though discussions may have become heated enough to re-
quire a peacemaker at times, great value existed in the Spirit
of enquiry which led members to debate ideas among themselves.
The young men of the Fabian Society-—Webb and Olivier, for
example, were three years younger than Shaw——Spent a great
deal of time together, for the most part heatedly discussing
the Socialist program. They used one another as "sounding
lShaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 112.
39
boards" and were quite frank in analyzing and criticizing
one another's arguments. Moreover, to further develop an
understanding of the issues involved in Socialism, Shaw,
along with other members of the Society became members of
the Hampstead Historic Society, originally a Marxist read-
ing group.
. . . [It] began as a sort of mutual improvement
society for those ambitionsFabians who desired to
read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest Marx and
Proudhon. Eventually it was turned into a sys-
tematic history class, in which each student took
his turn at being professor. . . . Thus they taught
each other what they themselves wished to learn,
acquiring the most thorough and minute knowledge
of the subject under discussion.
Shaw attended meetings of the group regularly once a
fortnight for a number of years and later reported, "They
knocked a tremendous lot of nonsense, ignorance, & vulgarity
"2
out of me.
At the same time, and on alternate weeks of the
Hampstead meetings, Shaw attended meetings of the Economic
Club, or Beeton group, which later became the Royal Economic
Society. This group, which "bore a formidable resemblance
"3
to a university seminar, concerned itself with a thorough
study of economics, an understanding of which Shaw felt was
1Henderson, Man of the Century, pp. 224-25.
2Shaw, letter to Henderson, January 17, 1905, cited
in Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 225.
3Irvine, p. 78.
4O
essential to Fabianism.
Shaw entered into all of these activities with relish,
even though he had to overcome a basic feeling of insecurity.
He often referred to the agonies of shyness he suffered as a
young man in London, which is exemplified by a passage in
which Shaw describes his reactions when invited to visit
friends of his mother and sister. "I suffered such agonies
of Shyness that I sometimes walked up and down the Embankment
for twenty minutes or more before venturing to knock at the
door: indeed I should have funked it altogether, and hurried
home asking myself what was the use of torturing myself When
it was so easy to run away, if I had not been instinctively
aware that I must never let myself off in this manner if I
meant ever to do anything in the world."1
As is often true of basically shy individuals, Shaw
tended to be rather loud and raucous in his early relation-
ships with his contemporaries.
Perhaps--though Shaw would be loathe to admit it—-
he felt at a disadvantage with his Fabian colleagues because
of his lack of formal education. Even though Shaw in later
Years blamed poverty for some of his social weaknesses, a
description by Olivier reveals a kind of condescension to-
Wï¬lrds Shaw not attributable to poverty alone:
\
1Shaw, "Preface to Immaturity," Prefaces, p. 679.
41
Needless to say we [webb and I] delighted in
Shaw's society--his talk was a continual entertain-
ment; and he regarded it, we tolerantly considered,
as his duty to talk wittily, if only for practice.
And the transparent generosity and liberality of
his character had an irrisistable charm. But Webb
and I were university graduates, I from Oxford,
and we often judged Shaw's education and his appre-
ciation of academically and socially established
humanities to be sadly defective.l
While Shaw's outspokenness may have been one charac-
teristic causing comment among his contemporaries, another
was his appearance during this period. The picture Shaw
presented in the early eighties was far from imposing. He
was tall, thin, and extremely pale. His beard, which became
a "trade-mark" in later years, was in its scraggly beginnings.
That beard-~red--and his red hair accentuated the pallor of
his face. Olivier later described him as "having a dead-
White complexion and orange patches of whisker about his
cheek and chin (a face, as Champion described it, '1ike an
2
unskillfully poached egg.')"
Shaw's clothes did little to enhance the picture.
Until 1885 he seemed to rely almost exclusively on the ward-
robe he acquired while still working in Ireland. Shaw later
wrote that he trimmed his "cuffs to the quick with scissors,
and wore a tall hat and soi-disant black coat, green with
lLord Sydney Olivier, letter to Henderson, June 8,
1931, cited in Henderson, Man of the Centugy, p. 212.
2Letter to Henderson, June 8, 1931, cited in Hen-
derson, Man of the Century, p. 212.
42
decay."l
After his income increased in 1885, Shaw began to
wear Jaeger suits, one-piece knitted garments invented by a
German doctor. While the visual image he created was strange,
the sound accompanying that sight was even stranger: Olivier
said that in one outfit Shaw sounded like a giant cricket
when he moved.2
DeSpite such factors which might have been handicaps
to others, Shaw was soon recognized not only as a valuable
member of the Fabian Society but also as a speaker for the
Socialist cause. Shortly after a major address to the In-
dustrial Remunerative Conference in 1885, Shaw found himself
sought after as a speaker. Although as a neOphyte he had
found it necessary to search for places to speak, he eventu-
ally was in the position of having so many requests that he
accepted invitations on a first come, first served basis.
Incidentally, even in his most impoverished days he followed
a policy he maintained all his life: no remuneration except
a third-class return fare from the Site of the speaking en-
gagement in the days when transportation costs were beyond
his means.
lClarence Rook,"George Bernard Shaw," The Chap-Book,
November 1, 1896, cited in Henderson, Man of the Centupy,
p. 110.
2
Irvine, p. 111.
43
Although not all of either Shaw's Speaking or Fabian
activities can be recounted in detail here, a few should be
described. Oneincident, which concerned a number of Socialist
groups but which involved Shaw as a Fabian representative,
occurred in 1887.
During the previous year the unemployed demonstrated
and got out of hand. The Socialists made an issue of the
right of free speech and the right to hold demonstrations,
a bone of contention throughout the eighties.1 Prior to a
demonstration planned by the Socialist groups, Shaw studied
the Act under which the police planned to prevent the demon-
stration and pointed out that the Act gave the police power
to regulate, not prohibit, such demonstrations. Armed with
this legal defense should he be arrested, Shaw spoke at the
northern section of the London gathering. The marchers, in-
cluding Shaw, then proceeded to Trafalgar Square. The for-
ward section of the marchers was turned back by police, but
Shaw "escaped" by mingling with a crowd of sightseers. He
made his way to the Square and found that the southern sec-
tion fared even worse. Blood was shed and a number of arrests
made--the day was named Bloody Sunday--but Shaw came out of
it unscathed, physically. While Shaw was branded for a time
lThe periodical, Our Corner, makes repeated refer-
ences to the harrassment of Socialist speakers and compares
their Situation with that of evangelists who were permitted
to hold meetings freely in public places.
44
as "coward," he did not seem particularly troubled by the
label. More important, it impressed upon him the impotence
of the "common man"--for whom he never seemed to have a great
deal of admiration-~against the police force of the estab-
lished government.
Another important incident occurred in the early
months of 1888 concerning the role the Fabian Society was to
play in politics. In essence, the majority decided to support
any candidate who would best advance the cause of Socialism.1
In addition to being a member of this Parliamentary League
which was formed, Shaw also participated in the Charing Cross
Parliament, in which the members practiced framing proposed
legislation into bills, as President of the Local Govern-
ment Board.
The Speaking activity of members of the Society was
also stepped-up in 1888. A Lecture Sub—Committee "decided
that the time had come for an organized attempt to present
Socialism to the intelligent British public. . . ."2 Members
were scheduled for Speaking engagements not only in London
1The discussion at the meeting at which the issue
was voted upon was apparently so heated that the minutes
contained the comment, "Subsequent to the meeting, the sec-
retary received notice from the manager of Anderson's Hotel
EWhere the meeting had been held] that the Society could
not be accommodated there for any further meetings."
2Cole, p. 24.
...-o- 4
...-
’ARA
:-
lbiv-
.Ap.
p
â€5.: v
Opvn
u... w
-.-
"iv.
‘.
n
“s
h
I!
(
45
but throughout England. One year, according to Fabian
records, 721 public lectures--not counting speaking engage-
ments made by individuals on their own-~were presented
through the auspices of the Society.1 Shaw participated
willingly in these speaking activities, traveling from one
end of London to the other and to other towns and cities in
England.
AS part of the decision in the late eighties to
participate more fully in the national political arena, the
Society invited outstanding politicians of the day to address
members of the group. After such Speeches the Fabians de-
scended upon the speaker with a vengeance. One such speaker
was R. B. Haldane, M. P., who answered an invitation by
Speaking on "Radical Remedies for Economic Evils." First
came an attack on Haldane's arguments by Webb and Annie
Besant. "Then up rose George Bernard Shaw, and as he spoke,
his gestures suggested to me the idea that he had got Mr.
Haldane impaled upon a needle, and was picking him to pieces
limb by limb, as wicked boys disintegrate flies. . . ."2
Although Socialist pursuits monOpolized Shaw's time
in the decade following his conversion by Henry George, Shaw's
Opportunity in 1889 to schedule Fabian meetings and papers for
lCole. p. 24.
2George Standring, The Radical, II, No. 8 (March 17,
1888), cited in Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 236.
46
the coming year foreshadowed the career which eventually made
him world-famous. Believing that a Socialist program should
not neglect the role of art, Shaw proposed a series of lec-
tures which is noteworthy in that on July 18, 1890, at St.
James Restaurant in London, Shaw delivered a lecture later
published as the well-known The Quintessence of Ibsenism.
A climax of Fabian influence during this period was
reached in the early nineties, when Society members partici-
pated actively in the election campaign of 1892. At that
time the Conservatives under Salisbury, who after alternating
in control with the Liberals, were the incumbents. Although
Liberal social legislation was, by Socialist standards,
limited-—the First Employers' Liability Act in 1880, the
Franchise Bill of 1884, and the Redistribution Bill of 1885;
the Fabians felt that working through an established political
party such as the Liberals Offered a greater opportunity for
Socialism's success than running independent candidates.
Consequently, they "permeated" the Liberal Party. The Fabians,
including Shaw, concentrated their efforts upon promoting the
Newcastle Program, which advocated "disestablishment of the
Church of England in Wales, and of the Church of Scotland;
local veto on liquor sales; abolition of plural voting; ex—
tension of the Employers' Liability Act; restriction of hours
1
of labor." Although Gladstone also made Home Rule for Ireland
1William L. Langer (comp. and ed.), An Encyglgpedia
of World Histopy (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, l952),p. 618.
47
a major issue, many Fabians believed that the Liberals won
the election of 1892, "largely on local issues supplied by
the Fabians."1 When Gladstone then repudiated the Newcastle
Program shortly after his election, Shaw and Webb launched
an attack against the government. With the unmasking of
"under-cover permeation" which accompanied the attack, the
political influence of the Fabians ended for the time being.2
Although there is some question as to the actual
influence wielded by the Fabian Society in the fortunes of
the Liberal Party in 1892 and the years following,3 there
is little doubt that the Fabians had entered actively into
politics and addressed themselves to influencing the voters
of England in that election. The extensive Speaking and
political activities of Fabians, including Shaw, continued
through the decade. In 1892, the Fabian Society issued its
Election Manifesto, Tract #40 written by Shaw, which urged
the formation of the Independent Labour Party. In January
of 1893 Shaw was one of twelve delegates from the Fabian
Society at the Bradford Conference, which resulted in the
I. L. P., although the eventual establishment of the Labour
Party, did not occur until the next period discussed in this
1Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 242.
2Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 242.
3After repudiating the Newcastle Program, Gladstone
concentrated on the Irish question and was defeated on the
Home Rule issue in 1894.
48
study.
Before closing this period of Shaw's life, however,
it is necessary to point out that although Socialist activities
seemingly consumed enough time to prevent an average man from
doing anything else, such was not the case with Shaw. That
he continued his novel writing until 1883 and that after
1885 his contributions to periodicals enabled him to earn his
living by writing has already been mentioned. Furthermore,
it has been indicated that he wrote a number of Fabian Tracts
and papers presented at societies other than the Fabian. A
brief review of his other writing is in order, but the in-
tention is not to deprecate his writing activities by men-
tioning them only briefly here; a comprehensive report of
them is not the province of this study.
The major writings of this Fabian period include: a
column, "Art Corner,“ in Our Corner in 1885-86; book reviews
from 1885 till 1888 for the Pall Mall Gazette; art critic
for The World from 1885 to 1889; a weekly column of music
reviews in The Star beginning in 1888, then continuing in
The World from 1890 until 1894; drama criticisms for The
Saturday Review from January, 1895 until 1898. It should be
kept in mind that these criticisms required regular reading
of books, visitations of art galleries, and attendance at
concerts and plays, as well as supplementary reading a con-
scientious writer such as Shaw insisted upon.
49
In addition to the above named reviews and other
contributions to a number of periodicals, Shaw revised and
published Theygpintessence of Ibsenism in 1891, completed
his first play, Widower's Houses, in 1892, The Philanderer
and Mrs. Warren's Profession in 1893, Arms and the Man and
Candida in 1894, The Man of Destiny and The Sanity of Art in
1895, XQELNever Can Tell in 1896, The Devil's Disciple in
1897, and Caesar and gleOpatra and The Perfect Wagnerite in
in 1898. During this decade, also, Shaw spent much time
attempting to get his plays staged, which was necessary not
only for COpyright purposes but also for realizing an in-
come from royalties. Although difficulties with the censor
constituted the greatest handicap he faced in this matter,
his “paper battle" with the p0pular actor Henry Irving also
created problems and consumed much time as he attempted to
get his plays produced.
Not all his time was taken up with work, as diaries
kept from 1885 to 1897.have revealed. For example, he played
card games and chess with his mother; he frequented boxing
matches and even sparred on at least one occasion with another
boxer; he hiked, bicycled, golfed, and went annually to the
Boat Race.1 In all, he had a wide range of interests.
Furthermore, Shaw spent considerable time with his
1Ervine, P. 151.
50
friends-—both men and women. Perhaps as a result of comments
and emphasis placed upon his speaking and writing by many
biographers, the general impression of Shaw may be of an
ascetic young man who had neither the time nor interest in
young women. Although his contact with women may have been
limited in his early years in London, such was not always
the case. Thereafter, he had numerous friendships with
women, of varying degrees Of "seriousness"-—though not aimed
toward marriage. Ervine states, "It is remarkable that all
the women who fell in love with G. B. S., and they were many,
were either beautiful or exceptionally intelligent, and were
usually both."1 Beatrice Webb, Sidney's wife, considered
Shaw a philanderer and warned Charlotte Payne-Townshend, who
later became Shaw's wife, about his habits.
With all of these activities, it is little wonder
that Shaw began to feel the effects of such a frenzied pace.
On January 29, 1898, Shaw, Who was also an avid and prolific
correspondent, wrote Ellen Terry of his busy life:
What a week! Nay, a fortnight! Three first
nights, two County Council election meetings, four
Vestry committees, one Fabian committee, a pamphlet
to write about the Southwark police business, an
adaptation of a novel, the Julius Caesar article,
and one frightful headache!2
l
Ervine, p. 167.
2ChristOpher St.John, ed., Ellen Terry7and Bernard
Shaw; A Correspondence (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1931),
p. 213.
51
In the same year that he wrote that letter, Shaw
developed an infection in his foot, attributed to a tight
shoe. Since he attempted to keep up with his many activities
rather than take prOper care of his foot, the condition
worsened.
Shaw was hobbling about on one foot when Charlotte
Payne-Townshend, whom Shaw met some two years previously
and who had performed some secretarial services for him,
returned from a trip to the Continent to find him ill and
living in miserable conditions:
He worked in a very small room which was in a
perpetual state of dirt and disorder. He kept the
window wide Open, day and night, winter and summer,
and the dust and smuts that entered thereby settled
on books, furniture and papers, being scattered
over a wider area whenever attempts were made to
remove them. The mass of matter on the table was
chaotic: heaps of letters, pages of manuscript,
books, envelOpes, writing-paper, pens, inkstands,
journals, butter, sugar, apples, knives, forks,
spoons, sometimes a neglected cup of cocoa or a
half—finished plate of porridge, a saucepan, and
a dozen other things, were mixed up indiscriminately,
and all undusted, as his papers must not be touched
. . . . Part of the awesome accumulation was due
to his method of dealing with literature: "Whilst
I am dressing and undressing I do all my reading.
The book lies Open on the table. I never shut it,
but put the next book on tOp of it long before it's
finished. After some months there is a mountain of
buried books, all wide Open, so that all my library
is distinguished by a page with the stain of a
quarter's dust or soot on it."
l
Pearson,A Full Length Portrait, p. 182.
52
Charlotte immediately made plans to move him out of
that chaotic room and to arrange for prOper care for him.
In a manner not unusual for him Shaw announced the ensuing
incidents in an unsigned newspaper article as follows:
As a lady and gentleman were out driving in
Henrietta-st., Covent—garden yesterday, a heavy
shower drove them to take Shelter in the Office
of the Superintendent Registrar there, and in
the confusion of the moment he married them.
The lady was an Irish lady named Miss Payne
Townshend, and the gentleman was George Bernard
Shaw.
. . .Mr. Bernard Shaw means to go off to the
country next week to recuperate, and this is the
second Operation he has undergone lately, the
first being conducted, not by a registrar, but
by a surgeon.
Although the marriage of these two, Who were no longer
in the "bloom of youth" and both previously on record as Op-
posing marriage, came as a surprise to friends who knew them
both as Fabians, Shaw's letters to Ellen Terry indicate that
he had been considering the marriage for some time and his
illness seemed to be the catalyst which led to a seemingly
sudden decision.
After the ceremony, Charlotte concentrated upon limit-
ing the activities of G. B. S. and nursing him back to health.
She was not immediately successful in achieving this goal:
in all, Shaw sustained Operations for necrosis, Sprained
ankles (three times) from trying to bicycle or otherwise use
lShaw, unsigned notice in the Star, June 2, cited by
Dunbar, p. 151.
53
the foot before it was properly healed, and a broken arm
before he was finally restored to health.
The efforts of Shaw's wife to insure that he not
overwork, however, were only partially responsible for the
changing nature of Shaw's activities, for not all of the
decisions Shaw made regarding changes date from his marriage.
In general, however, and without attempting to pinpoint the
various causes or specific dates, several important changes
in Shaw's life came in 1898: resignation from The Saturday
Review as drama critic, thus eliminating not only a weekly
article but regular attendance at the theatre; initiation of
play publishing, reducing the pressure of looking for pro-
ducers for his plays; and curtailment of his Speaking acti-
vities.
A number of factors probably led to Shaw's decision
to limit his Speaking, and a closer look at possible reasons
for it seems in order here. Certainly time and health were
important factors. Perhaps, too, he felt that although nearly
two decades of speaking garnered him the satisfaction of a
growing and appreciative audience,he was effecting little
visible social and economic change in the actions of his
audiences. Pearson presents still another reason:
The little societies calling themselves Leagues
and Federations, with their local branches, mostly
in debt over rent, subsisted on precarious penny-
a-week subscriptions and COppers collected in their
54
hats at their meetings, with scraps of profit from
the sale of Justice (Hyndman's paper), The Common-
weal (Morris's paper), and sundry tracts. For some
years they provided Shaw with the audiences he
wanted: weekly wage—earning working-class folk in
the Open air or in cheap little halls where the
seats were all free. But they sooner or later made
the discovery that when Shaw was the attraction not
only were the little halls too small for the audi-
ence, but that most of these were not heroes of the
horny hand and the fustian coat (an Obsolete descrip-
tion formerly current among the Chartists) but people
who were quite well able to pay half-crowns and even
five shillings for reserved seats. Shaw, to his dis-
gust, found himself Speaking in fashionable concert
halls to rows of ladies in cart-wheel hats, escorted
by very obvious young city men and professionals,
with ShOpkeeperS in the shilling seats and the pro-
letariat uncomfortable and shy in the free seats
(if any) at the back. Some of the local societies
lived for years on a single Shaw lecture. He had
to drOp the poorer workers, and put forward a new
set of arguments for socialism in the middle classes.
But he had no fancy for being used in this fashion
as a money—maker. He threw his whole budget of
applications for lectures into the waste paper
basket; and from that time (about 1898) abandoned
his weekly pulpiteering, thenceforth speaking only
on Special occasions like any other politician.
Although Shaw curtailed his Speaking after 1898 for
reasons which can only be conjectured, his platform appear—
ances did not by any means come to an end, as this paper will
subsequently Show; but other interests "took center stage."
Ygars of Increased Dramatic Writing
Shaw's attention during this period focused upon
writing and producing plays, but since this paper is concerned
with activities which have bearing on Shaw as a public Speaker,
lPearson, A Full Length Portrait, pp. 56-57.
55
only a very brief summary of his activities as a dramatist
will be given here.
Full-length plays completed after 1898 and before
1914 include Captain Brassbound's Conversion (1899), Th§_
Admiraple Bashville (1900), Man and Superman (1903), gphp.
Bull's Other Island (1904), How He Lied to Her Husband
(1904), Major Barbara (1905), The Doctor's Dilemma (1906),
Getting Married (1908), The Shewiag-Up of Blanco Posnet
(1909), Misalliance (1910), Fanny's First Play_(l9ll),
Aggrpcles and the Lion (1911), Overruled (1912), and
Pygmalion (1912). In addition, he wrote several short plays.
Since as stated earlier, Shaw had already made the
decision to publish his plays, he proceeded with the added
task of preparing them for publication. This action was
unusual for this era, for "up to this time, publication of
plays had been of two kinds: (1) that of a poet like Tenny-
son or Browning (2) "acting" editions with professional
technicalities and reliance on technical interpretation."
Furthermore, not only was Shaw departing from usual proce-
dure in publishing plays, but his point of view toward a
writer's functions in such situations led to additional
work on three counts. First, believing that the reading
public should not be expected to understand technical stage
lRattray, p. 120.
56
instructions, Shaw,therefore, incorporated detailed descrip-
tions of characters and settings into the plays. Second,
he supervised all aspects of publication, from choice of
paper and type to kind of binding; he did his own proof-
reading and insisted that his punctuation and Spelling in-
structions be followed exactly. Third, the publication of
the plays gave him another Opportunity for expounding his
ideas in prefaces, and essays were written Which may have
had only a tenuous connection with the theme of the plays.
Another activity connected with his career as
dramatist concerned the production of his plays. Through-
out his life, G. B. S. was concerned with performances of
his plays, and he engaged in much correSpondence with actors
and managers in the United States as well as in England about
who should play which roles in his plays. In addition,
during the years of the Vendrenne—Barker productions at the
Court Theatre early in the twentieth century, Shaw directed
several of his own plays, a time-consuming activity.
Although Shaw concentrated on dramatic writing during
this period, he also continued with his political activities,
particularly on the local government level. In a non-con-
tested election on May 18, 1897, Shaw had gained a seat on
the St. Pancras Vestry, the local governing body. When St.
Pancras became a Borough in 1899, Shaw was elected a member
of the Borough Council on November 1, 1900.
57
There are conflicting reports of Shaw's effectiveness
as a Vestryman and Councillor, but there seems little doubt
that Shaw was conscientious in fulfilling his duties. The
. 1 .
records Show that he was regular in attendance, attending
192 meetings during the six years he was a member. "These
attendances were not merely nominal; each of them involved
at least two hours' work at the Town Hall, and often three
or four, Mr. Shaw being admittedly one of the most active
and diligent of Committee Men."
In the Vestry and later in the Council, individuals
could bring up matters by means of a Notice of Motion. Even
though the minutes Show that in his six years Shaw gave more
. 3 . .
notices than anyone else, he apparently did not monopolize
the meetings. As another Vestryman and Councillor Who at-
tended regularly during Shaw's period of service later wrote:
All the Vestrymen and women, and the Officials
Whose duty it was to be in attendance, revelled in
the fortnightly entertainments, for such they be-
came whilst G. B. S. was there. Owing to his
humorous, pungent and witty style of speech we
were delighted to listen, and were attracted by
an exquisite personal distinction and quality
of voice. G. B. S. did not reign supreme over
lHis illness, of course, resulted in a number of missed
meetings, as some reporters have pointed out.
2Leaflet by the Progressive Committee announcing the
nomination of Shaw and Sir W. N. Geary, cited in Henderson,
Man of the Century, pp. 265-66.
3Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 262.
58
the proceedings, nor did he take more than his fair
Share of time. . . .
G. B. S. performed his due portion of municipal
duties, and although at first he was looked upon as
a jester and theorist with an alarming audacity, he
soon proved that he was a practical administrator
as well. . . . He was essentially a gentlemanly and
respectable rebel, although he shocked and rebuked
his Victorian colleagues. Many of them held G. B. S.
in the highest esteem, and recognized that he raised
the standard of the Council. . . .
Shaw repeatedly Spoke and wrote of the importance of
committee work and always participated actively on committees
for a number of organizations. AS a Vestryman and Councillor
he was a member of the Electric Lighting, Health, Parlia-
mentary, Housing, and Drainage Committees. "His services
on the committees were so valuable that the unique step was
taken of extending him a vote of thanks, an honor usually
reserved for chairmen and vice-chairman."
After the expiration of his term in 1903, St. Pancras
Borough was given representation on the London County Council,
and Shaw and Sir W. N. M. Geary were nominated as candidates
for the posts by the Progressives.
In his campaigning in the early months of 1904, Shaw
spent half of his time dealing with the issue of religious
3
instruction in the schools. He was particularly concerned
1Alfred G. Corrick, "George Bernard Shaw: St. Pancras
Vestryman and Councillor," St. Pancras Journal, IV, No. 6
(November—December, 1950), cited by Henderson, Man of the Cen-
tury, pp. 261-62.
2Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 262.
3
Rattray, p. 155.
59
with the Education Act of 1902, which included subsidies to
Church schools whenever necessary so that new schools need
not be built. Although there was much Opposition to this
policy, Shaw did not hesitate to Speak in favor of it. With
this stand as well as with comments on other issues Shaw
tended to alienate the voters throughout his campaign. On
February 27 Beatrice Webb wrote in her diary:
. . .He [Sidney Webb] is now turning his attention
to getting G. B. S. in for St. Pancras. What ef-
fect G. B. S.'S brilliant slashing to the right
and the left among his own nominal supporters will
have, remains to be seen—-the party organizers
have long ago given up the seat as lost. . . .
The election results were:
Gastrell (Municipal Reformer) 1,927
Goldsmith (Municipal Reformer) 1,808
Shaw (Progressive) 1,460
Geary (Progressive) 1,412
On March 7 Beatrice Webb's diary had the following entry:
G. B. S. beaten badly; elsewhere the Progres-
sives romping back with practically undiminished
numbers. . . . He certainly Showed himself hope-
lessly intractable during the election: refused
to adOpt any orthodox devices as to address and
polling cards, inventing brilliant ones of his
own; all quite unsuited to any constituency but
Fabians or "Souls". Insisted that he was an
atheist; that, though a teetotaler, he would
force every citizen to imbibe a quartern of rum
to cure any tendency to intoxication; laughed at
the Nonconformist conscience; chaffed the Catholics
about transubstantiation; abused the Liberals, and
contemptuously patronized the Conservatives--until
nearly every section was equally disgruntled.
lBeatrice Webb, Our Partnership; ed. Barbara Drake
and Margaret I. Cole (London: Longmans, Green and Co.,
1948), p. 282.
2Webb, p. 284.
60
Shaw's own report, written in the third person at a later
date, had him stating that he alienated
. . . the Nonconformist by insisting on the need
of the Church schools for rate support, the Church
by having himself nominated by the wife of an emi-
nent Methodist minister, and both the licensed
victuallers and Temperance extremists by urging
the municipalization of the trade in drink, besides
his personal notoriety as a leader and preacher of
Fabian Socialism.
Perhaps Shaw wasn't completely disappointed at losing
the election, his first and last full-fledged candidacy be-
2
fore the electorate for public office. On June 30 of that
year he wrote Florence Farr:
I am off on Saturday to The Old House (my new
house), Welwyn, Herts, to write a play, and if I
come up (to Londoi} , it is only Fabian Committees,
etc., that will drag me from my work. I have spent
a month in Rome and have done nothing but election
business and Candida rehearsal since February, the
result being acute unhappiness at my wasted life.
I will do nothing but write for the rest of the
year.3
Following his defeat at the polls. Shaw concentrated
on his writing, although, as his letter indicates, he con-
tinued with his Fabian activities. A noteworthy feature of
his Fabian work during this period occurred in the years
1906-1907, when he was closely involved with the controversy
centered upon H. G. Wells.
1Shaw, St. Pancras Journal, May, 1947, cited in
Rattray, p. 156.
2Before his local government experiences he had been
approached to stand for election to Parliament but did not
choose to become a candidate.
3Cited in Rattray, p. 156.
61
Wells, who had joined the Fabian Society a few years
earlier, began to express disagreement with Society policies;
and on February 9, 1906, he read "Faults of the Fabians" to
the Society.
The faults of the Fabian Society, as seen by
Wells, were comprehensive. 'It is small, it is
shabbily poor, it is collectively inactive.’
. . . It is 'remarkably unbusinesslike, inadapt-
able, and uninventive in its ways.‘ It does not
welcome members; it puts them through a stern
test, . . . and when they have joined orders
them to do fantastic things-~lecture, write
letters to the local paper, give away tracts,
hold meetings, riot, rebel.
Wells particularly objected to the "tone of levity" of the
Old Gang, as they came to be called, and singled out Shaw as
the worst offender in this respect, although he denied he
was attacking Shaw: ". . . I do assail the strained attempts
to play up to Shaw, the constant endeavors of members devoid
of any natural wit or wildness to catch his manner, to ape
his egotism, to fall in with an assumed pretence that this
grave high business of Socialism, to which it would be a
small offering for us to give our lives, is an idiotic
middle-class joke."
Wells then asked for a special committee to consider
his prOposals, a request which the Society granted. The Ex-
1
2
Cole, p. 119.
H. G. Wells, Remarks to the Fabian Society, cited
by Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 253.
62
ecutive Committee also gave him the privilege of nominating
anyone he chose "up to a reasonable number" to sit with him
on the special committee.1 After the committee was appointed,
however, Wells left for America, and the report was not fin-
ished till October. An answer was then prepared by the Ex-
ecutive Committee, chiefly the writing of Shaw, and both
reports were distributed to members of the group. From Dec-
ember, 1906, through March, 1907, in a series of seven meet-
ings, the Society discussed the two reports.
Although the report of the Special Committee did not
differ a great deal from Wellsksoriginal charge, his oral
presentation of it before the assembled Fabians was poor.
Furthermore, his "all or nothing" approach—-even going so
far as to suggest expulsion of the Old Gang from the Society
--alienated many. Shaw, selected by the Executive to answer
Wells, was infuriated by Wells's poor taste in name-calling,
by his failure to respect the procedure of meetings, and by
his failure to respect the function of a chairman. Shaw
took advantage of his experience as a speaker to annihilate
Wells and was ruthless in dealing with the young author.
Pearson reports that Shaw's final remarks, which resulted
in the withdrawal of WellstsprOposal, ran as follows:
"Mr. Wells in his speech complained of the long
delay by the Old Gang in replying to his report.
1
Cole, p. 121.
63
But the exact figures are: Wells ten months,
the Old Gang six weeks. During his committee's
deliberations he produced a book on America.
And a very good book too. But whilst I was
drafting our reply I produced a play." Shaw
paused; for several moments his eyes glanced
vacantly round the ceiling; he seemed to have
lost his train of thought; members began to
fidget uncomfortably; at last he went on:
"Ladies and gentlemen, I paused there to en-
able Mr. Wells to say, 'And a very good play
too.'" The audience shouted with laughter,
burst following burst, each louder than the
last. Wells smiled self-consciously. Shaw
sat down. Fabius had won.
Even though not all of Wells's criticisms were with-
out foundation, and the Society subsequently adOpted some of
the Special Committee recommendations, the methods used by
Wells were objected to by many. Nevertheless, Wells remained
in the Society only a short time and after being appointed
to one or two committees and desultory activity, he resigned
in 1908.
In 1911 another controversy developed in the Society,
though not of the same prOportions as the Wells issue. Shaw,
then fifty-five, resigned from the Executive Committee to
make room for new blood.2 "He was until the mid thirties
1Cited in Pearson, A Full Length Portrait, p. 229.
2Edward R. Pease, in The History of the Fabian Society
(3rd ed.; intro. Margaret Cole; London: F. Cass, 1963), p. 223,
expressed pleasure that Shaw continued to be active in the
Society but noted a difficulty which came from his resigna-
tion. "His freedom from office does not always make the task
of his successors easier. The loyalest of colleagues, he had
always defended their policy, whether or not it was exactly
of his own choice; but in his capacity of private member his
64
the star turn at the annual series of six lectures by the
Fabian Society in London; but his Fabianizing period closed
with his resignation; and thereafter he spoke for himself
alone. The political wirepuller, conciliator and committee
man was dead: the solitary prOphet remained."l
Although biographers appear to accept at face value
Shaw's explanation for resigning from the Executive Commit—
tee as simply to make room for younger members, other factors
may also have played a part in this decision. There was, of
course, the increased time spent with his work in the theatre.
Also, since the near-complete breakdown in his health some
twelve years previously, Shaw had limited his activities
somewhat, occasionally pressured into respite from work by
Mrs. Shaw and her desire to travel. Furthermore, his resigna-
tion may have been a reflection of his growing dissatisfac-
tion with the ability of men to govern themselves,and, in
particular, he seemed at odds with the direction being taken
by the Labour Party. Although he did not turn away from the
needs of working men, he found little in the working man's
political organization, the Labour Party, to please him. In
1914 he wrote Augustin Hamon:
unrivalled influence is occasionally something of a diffi-
culty. If he does not happen to approve of what the Execu-
tive proposes he can generally persuade a Business Meeting
to vote for something elsei"
lHenderson, Man of the Century, p. 283.
.N
...v
a
1
.n‘
65
The Labour Party is good in that it represents
labour, but bad in that it represents poverty and
ignorance, and it is anti-social in that it sup-
ports the producer against the consumer and the
worker against the employer instead of supporting
the workers against the idlers. The Labour Party
is also bad on account of its false democracy,
which substitutes the mistrust, fear and incapa-
city of the masses for genuine political talent,
and which would make the peOple legislators in—
stead of leaving them what they are at present,
the judges of legislators.l
One further set of circumstances should be considered
before leaving the question of the reasons for Shaw's resign-
ing from the Executive in 1911. Since 1905, when Campbell-
Bannerman and then Asquith were Prime Ministers, Parliament
passed such social legislation as a Trade Disputes Bill and
a WOrkingman‘s Compensation Act in 1906, followed by The
National Insurance Act in 1911 and a Minimum Wage Law in 1912.
Although a resulting budget which shifted â€the tax burden
from producers to possessors of wealth, in the form of in-
come and inheritance taxes, levies of unearned income, heavy
rates on monOpolies (such as liquor licenses) and on unearned
2 . . .
increments of land," resulted in mixed reactions from Shaw,
the issue of importance here is that while the Socialism
advocated by Shaw and the Fabians had not been accomplished,
some of the chief arguments which had been used were weakened
by social legislation. Thus these events, also, may have
1Cited in Ervine, pp. 472—73.
2
Langer, p. 620.
CI“:
:35.
.
Anya-a
p
UV...\
(I)
n-
a
On»
'¢.\
v...
.I
‘0‘.
»v
(I)
I'll
â€I
66
‘played a part in Shaw's decision to change the nature of his
Fabian activities.
While Shaw became relatively less concerned with
domestic conditions during this period (except for the Irish
Question), he began to pay increasing attention to the inter-
national situation. Growing interest in such affairs can be
said to date from the beginning of the century, when England
became involved in the Boer War and Shaw was asked to write
a Fabian Tract upon it. To the surprise of Fabians and
those of the Liberal persuasion, Shaw expressed his agree-
ment with England's position in the conflict. In essence,
though he didn't agree with all the methods used by England
throughout the Empire, he believed that it was better for
the larger nations to exert influence over under-developed
countries than to let them go on their own at that point
and that a strong army and universal conscription was neces-
sary to insure this situation.
With this foreshadowing of interest in international
affairs, Shaw's activities at the close of this period just
prior to the outbreak of World War I are not surprising.
Although the average Englishman probably paid little atten-
tion to the events in Europe which were setting the stage
for a major conflagration, Shaw in the second decade of the
twentieth century began to fear the outbreak of war.
67
Two articles, in particular, are of interest at this
point: "Armaments and Conscription: A Triple Alliance
Against the War" in The Daily Chronicle, March 18, 1913, and
â€The Peace of EurOpe and How to Attain It" in The Daily News,
January 1, 1914. In both articles the arguments were es-
sentially similar: England, France, and Germany should enter
an agreement whereby if any one of them violated the neutrality
of either of the other two, the remaining two would align
against the agressor; further, if any other party attacked
any one of the three nations, the three would unite against
the agressor. In addition, Shaw spoke out in favor of con-
scription for England, for he felt the agreement would be
worthless without the force of arms behind it.
The articles caused little comment. Indeed, Shaw
later complained that his decision to have an actress utter,
“Not bloody likely," on the stage1 caused a much greater stir.
As war threatened all of EurOpe, Shaw again changed
the emphasis of his efforts: he temporarily suspended his
dramatic writing as he turned his attention to the conflagra-
tion.
Years of Political Frustration and
IncreasingyFame As a Dramatist
The political and military situation selected as a
demarcation point in Shaw's career is familiar, but a recapitu-
~
1In April, 1914, Pygmalion was presented for the
first time in London. Eliza Doolittle spoke the line which
Caused such a controversy.
68
lation of a shortened timetable of events leading to the out-
break of World War I would be helpful. In 1914, the follow-
. 1 ‘ . .
ing events occurred after the first war declaration:
July
July
July
July
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Shaw,
28
who
Austria declared war on Serbia; Germany
hOped for negotiations with Russia;
France agreed to support Russia
Germany tried to bring pressure on
Austria; bid for British neutrality
rejected; Russians first ordered gen-
eral mobilization, then mobilization
against Austria only
Russia ordered general mobilization
Germany issued ultimatum to Russia;
inquired into French attitude; refused
British request for Belgian neutrality
French reply to Germany: would be
guided by own interests
3:55 - French mobilization
4:00 - German mobilization
7:00 - German declaration of war on Russia
The British cabinet, after much disagree-
ment, voted to assure France she would
protect coast against attack; Germany
began invasion of Luxemburg and requested
permission to cross Belgian territory,
which was refused
Germany declared war on France on flimsy
pretext; invaded Belgium
England declared war on Germany, the in-
vasion of Belgium giving Sir Edward Grey
a welcome argument in the cabinet and in
Parliament
had decided to concentrate on pamphleteer-
ing during the war, contributed an appeal for Belgian relief,
1Dates and descriptions are from Langer, pp. 762—63.
I .'
b vi
ya“.
-\-u n
*5
(J)
0 1
(D
up
aU.’
“C.
-A'
“‘VQ
-F
.HE
R.
:5-
-§
ll‘
.
(u
69
which appeared in The Nation on November 7, 1914, as an "Open
Letter to the President of the United States."1 An article
containing substantially the same arguments appeared about
two weeks later as a supplement to The New Statesman, a
Socialist periodical founded by the Webbs. Although first
reactions to this essay, entitled Common Sense About the War,
were negligible, repercussions from the United States and,
more important, the use of certain of Shaw's arguments by
the Germans for propaganda purposes, raised a furious re-
action in Britain.
The first of two major points in the essay which
enraged the British was Shaw's vituperative attack on the
British Foreign Office in general and Sir Edward Grey in
particular. He criticized his adOpted countrymen for secret
alliances, and particularly for not making absolutely clear
to Germany that England would come to the support of Belgium
and France. He blamed the war on the churches, the press,
_and the party system.
The other point which infuriated the British and
which was used by the Germans for prOpaganda purposes was
Shaw's argument that the Germans had no choice but to invade
Belgium. This, in effect, relieved Germany of the onus of
responsibility for the war.
1In some sources titled "Open Letter to President
Wilson."
70
Shaw, whose loyalty to the Allies has since been well
established, was hurt by the personal attack which followed,
for he believed such revelations as well as suggestions for
postwar treatment of the enemy,1 was essential.
Furthermore, the points of view expressed by Shaw in
Common Sense About the War haven't been completely negated
and are still a subject for controversy. Many historians
for example, point out that Germany could not fight a war on
two fronts (Russia declared war on Germany before Germany in—
vaded Belgium), and that the Schlieffen plan, calling for a
flanking movement through Belgium, had to be completed before
Germany could attend to the Eastern front. Whether an out-
spoken attitude on the part of Britain would have deterred
Germany is a moot question, however.
A more cogent argument against Shaw's attack on Grey
and the Foreign Office is in regard to timing. Shaw can be
admired for having the courage of his convictions, but the
events prior to the outbreak of the war could not be undone
by his criticisms of those actions.
Shaw's reaction to the sinking of the Lusitania in
1915 intensified the antagonism of many peOple in England.
lBiographers point out the similarity of Shaw's pro-
posals to Wilson's Fourteen Points but admit there is no
direct evidence that Wilson was familiar with Shaw's writings
on the issue.
Ve“
i s
a
"6:
AH»
pd.
H\v
ml
71
He was impatient with the fuss over "killing saloon passen-
gers;" and many peOple objected to his outspoken and irre-
verent references to the tragedy and did not listen to his
explanation for his point of view:
To me, with my mind full of the hideous cost of
Neuve Chapelle, Ypres, and the Gallipoli landing,
the fuss about the Lusitania seemed almost a
heartless impertinence, though I was well acquaint—
ed personally with the three best-known victims
. . . . I even found a grim satisfaction, very
intelligible to all soldiers, in the fact that
the civilians who found the war such splendid
British sport should get a sharp taste of what
it was to the actual combatants.
This last statement was aimed at those who tended to
glorify the war, an attitude which was fairly prevalent,
especially in the early years of that struggle,2 but Shaw's
hatred of war was interpreted as pro—German feeling.
One other incident which aroused indignation was an
outgrowth of the Irish Easter Rebellion of 1916. One of
those involved was Roger Casement, an Irish-born former
British officer who had gone to Germany, offered to recruit
Irish for the Germans, and was put ashore in Ireland from a
German submarine. He was subsequently captured, tried for
treason, and hanged by the British. Although the defense
lShaw, "Preface to Heartbreak House," Prefaces, p. 388.
2Shaw sent a letter to two newspapers early in the
war asking for government bomb shelters. (Editors refused to
publish it, feeling that such action was unnecessary and that
Shaw's letter was merely another attempt to arouse the pub-
lic.
72
Shaw wrote for Casement was not used at the trial, Shaw's
position in the sordid case--Shaw held that Casement was
Irish, not English, and thus could not be guilty of treason
--upset many citizens.
The combination of these circumstances resulted in
Shaw's being flooded with vituperative and obscene letters.
In addition, some members of the press suggested that his
plays should be boycotted, friends avoided him, the Drama-
tists' Club expelled him, pe0ple walked out of the room
when he entered, and Asquith was heard to say, "The man
ought to be shot!"
Many who treated Shaw in this manner later apologized
for their actions, of course, but even more noteworthy was
his reactions to the unpleasant situation; he wrote later
to Pearson:
. . .But this phase of war delirium soon passed
off. Locke and Squire came to me and mutely in-
vited me to shake hands, which of course I did.
To me war fever is like any other epidemic, and
what the patients say or do in their delirium is
no more to be counted against them than if they
were all in bed with brain fever.
(My public meetings were crowded and successful.
The Daily Mail sent a reporter to see me mobbed.
He found me being bombarded with questions about
the soldiers' allowance by a friendly audience.l
Thus Shaw, despite his outspokenness, again began to
be accepted by the British public. Furthermore, even though
lPearson, A Full Length Portrait, p. 295.
73
the former Prime Minister, Asquith, had censured Shaw for
his comments earlier in the war, the Government honored Shaw
in 1917 with an invitation tendered by the British Commander-
in-Chief, Sir Douglas Haig, to visit the front. Shaw did so;
and although he previously had some difficulty in getting a
hearing in the newspapers, his impressions of the visit to
the Continent were subsequently published by the press.
The frustrations he felt in the early years of the
war were not yet at an end, however, for in 1917 he suffered
another disappointment. Lloyd George, then Prime Minister,
was naming an Irish Convention to resolve the problem with
that country, and Shaw hOped to be appointed. Ervine reported:
. . . Meeting the wife of an eminent politician in
Bond Street one afternoon, he mentioned his ambition
to her, in the hOpe that it would be repeated to her
husband, and was angered by seeing a look of amaze-
ment in her eyes as if she could not believe her
ears. She hurriedly fled from him, and no more was
heard of the matter. When he related this incident
to me, his resentment was deep. 'I could see she
regarded me as an amiable buffoon who was welcome
at her parties in Downing Street, but would be out
of place in a serious committeei'l
Although Shaw's essay writing continued throughout
the war and after--none raising quite the storm as his 1914-
16 efforts, his dramatic writing during the war was limited
to a few short plays and Heartbreak House, completed in 1916.
His next play was the monumental pentateuch, Back to Methuselah,
1Ervine, p. 416.
74
completed in 1921, followed by the 1925 Nobel prize-winningl
_gint Joan completed in 1923, and, after a seven-year gap,
The Apple Cart. The other major work of this period was
The Intelligent Woman's Guide to Socialism (1928), on which
the septuagenarian spent three years.
Shaw's public speaking also continued throughout the
period, including addresses over the new medium, radio. Al-
though invited to speak over B. B. C. as early as 1924, he
did not make a radio address until 1929. Since his first
invitation stipulated that his speech must be free of contro-
versial material, Shaw refused to participate until the regu-
lation was removed.
Even before starting to give radio speeches Shaw
looked upon radio as an important means of communication.
In a 1926 speech he stated:
I will ask you to try and imagine what the next
general election will be. Here we shall be, a
1He had hitherto declined titles and honors; when
he accepted the Nobel prize for literature he donated the
(7000 award for the establishment of the Anglo—Swedish
Literary Foundation.
2Although censorship of the B. B. C. was originally
under the jurisdiction of the Post Office Department, these
functions were transferred to the B. B. C. in 1926 with the
stipulation that "the prohibition of political, industrial,
and religious controversy" was to be maintained. The Gov-
ernment removed this ban in 1928, although the B. B. C. was
expected to use discretion, and gradually the new policy was
put into effect. See "Controversy in Broadcasting," Th§_
B.y§. g. Handbook 1929 (London: The B. B. C.), pp. 39—41.
75
handful of men, tired out of our lives of public
speaking and travelling; we shall be rushing about
the country, going into stuffy meetings which will
perhaps vary from sixty to seventy in number to
perhaps, 3,000 to 4,000; and we shall know that 90
per cent of those audiences are our supporters.
But the peOple we want to get at are the people
who never go to public meetings. Consequently
public oratory and public speaking, owing to this
scientific discovery of broadcasting, has now ac-
quired an importance it never had before.
His respect for this medium was such that in his later years
he remarked to Henderson, "If I were beginning my career to-
day, I would never step on a platform; I would speak only on
. 2 .
the Wireless." In 1929 Shaw was appOinted to the B. B. C.
committee on the pronunciation of English words, and in 1933
he became chairman of that committee.
In the post-war years Shaw saw the Allies, and Eng-
land in particular, exacting the type of peace he warned
against earlier. Furthermore, a depression such as Shaw
predicted beset England, accompanied by considerable labor
strife. When the Labour Party came into power for a short
and ineffectual period of time in 1924, Shaw's disillusion-
ment with man's ability to govern himself grew; and he be-
came increasingly critical of democracy. Not until the
next period, however, did he take the ultimate stand that
brought him so much adverse criticism in his late years.
1Bernard Shaw, The Socialism of Shaw, ed. with an
intro. James Fuchs (New York: Vanguard Press, 1926), p. 149.
2Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 193.
76
Years of Homage and Decline
On his return from a 1931 visit in Russia which in-
cluded an audience with Stalin, Shaw extolled the Communist
system, even excusing Russian policies of â€liquidation" as
necessary. Since for years Shaw had made a distinction be-
tween the Socialism he advocated and the kind of Communism
in effect in Russia, even his closest friends and his Social-
ist colleagues found it difficult to understand his espousal
of the Communist cause.
Another Shavian point of view in this era, when the
world was in the midst of depression, when dictators were
assuming power in EurOpe, and when the threat of war was
once again in the air, caused consternation: Shaw, who had
long had an admiration for the strong man who could "lead"
others, lauded the dictators. Even though he was much
maligned for this attitude, in all fairness it should be
pointed out that his praises of Mussolini, Hitler, and
Stalin received more publicity than his occasionally stated
reservations about the dictatorships.
Another assault upon Shaw's character came after the
1932 publication of The Adventures of the Black Girl in Her
Search for God, written by Shaw in South Africa while his
wife was recovering from an automobile accident. The unortho-
dox views expressed in this controversial book resulted in
77
attacks from all quarters, including that of clergymen from
their pulpits. Even though Shaw had been concerned for a
number of years with religious problems--in plays, essays,
and speeches-~the public was not ready to accept his unique
views. They accepted at face value his declaration of
atheism, although in reality he was a deeply religious man;
and they often neglected to note that his sharpest assaults
were aimed at established churches and at those who professed
religious belief but did not act in accordance with religious
principles.
Although many of Shaw's views were unpopular, as a
personality he was unrivaled, and many in the United States
looked forward to a visit Shaw often said he'd never make.
While on a cruise around the world, the Shaws landed on the
West Coast, staying overnight with William Randolph Hearst
at his home north of Los Angeles, and then, after travelling
to the East Coast via the Panama Canal, stOpped in New York
City for one day. On April 11 Shaw delivered a speech in
New York City before the American Academy of Political
Science, the one invitation of scores that he accepted.
As Shaw approached eighty, he began to limit his
activities more and more. He resigned his committee chair-
manships on his eightieth birthday, and on his eighty-sixth
birthday resigned from all committees.l
lHenderson, Man of the Century, p. 868.
78
On the other hand his "retirement" from public
speaking is more difficult to pin-point. Henderson, after
stating that Shaw retired from the platform at the age of
sixty-seven added this footnote:
This is the earliest date he ever gave for
that of retirement. No doubt he was referring
to public debates and set lectures of a prOpa-
gandist character. In June, 1936, then almost
eighty, he said at Newcastle: "I have retired
from public speaking." In Sixteen Self Sketches,
p. 105, he says of his "acquired technique as a
platform artist": "It lasted until my final
retirement from personal performances in 1941,
my eighty-fifth year.†Like the Operatic diva,
Shaw made farewell appearances on the platform
from his sixty-seventh until his eighty-fifth
year.l
Actually, however, Shaw's speaking continued even
beyond 1941. For example, when on October 9, 1946, he was
made the first honorary freeman of St. Pancras, his sche-
duled speech, Which he was unable to deliver in person, was
recorded by the B. B. C. at Shaw's flat and then broadcast
later that evening. At a still later date, when he was
ninety-two, Shaw spoke at the religious service dedicating
a new gate at the ruins of the abbey at Ayot St. Lawrence.2
Thus, though he "retired" from public Speaking more than
once and even had to use printed cards to send his regrets
for the many invitations to speak, the lure of the platform
1
Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 868.
2
Rattray, p. 290.
79
was apparently so great that not even his "retirement" pre-
vented him from appearing before the public.
Nevertheless, the pace of his work slowed considerably
in the thirties and forties. He continued to write plays un-
til the last year of his life, though none of them reached
the heights of Saint Joan. He also continued to write pre-
faces, and he spent much of his time editing and revising
material he previously wrote. Although he became quite
feeble, he continued his daily walks and his log sawing
until the final tumble which eventually led to the compli-
cations causing his death. He could not, and would not, give
up his writing, no matter how difficult it became for him:
"I cannot hold my tongue nor my pen. As long as I live I
must write. If I stopped writing I should die for want of
something to do."1
Although in his younger days Shaw complained that
his ideas were ignored by the press, in his later years he
had more than his share of publicity; the press sought him
out for his Opinion on a wide range of subjects, for he
always seemed to have something "quotable" to say. So many
anecdotes exist that it is often difficult to separate fact
from fiction.
1 . .
Shaw, "Preface to Buoyant Billionsy Farfetched
Fables, & Shakes versus Shaw," The Complete Prefaces of
Bernard Shaw (London: Hamlyn, 1965), p. 891.
80
In addition, Shaw knew many of the great and near-
great of two vastly different centuries: he counted as
friends such diverse personalities as Sidney Webb and Gene
Tunney. Although Opinions they have expressed of him are
as diverse as Shaw's friends and acquaintances the over-
whelming portrait which emerges is one highlighted by a
vitality and intellectual curiosity which lasted throughout
a long and active life.
Shaw the political thinker, the playwright, the
philOSOpher--to name but a few of the labels attached to him
--has been evaluated by a succession of critics. Their con-
clusions appear on both sides of the ledger, some denouncing
him but more of them pointing to his greatness.
As a person Shaw has been described as generous,
considerate, thoughtful, shy, humble--and parsimonious,
ruthless, insensitive, domineering, egotistical. Each ad-
jective can be substantiated by illustrations from his life;
again, however, his assets appear greater and more influential
than his liabilities.
Shaw believed in speaking out, but,as others have
pointed out, Shaw concentrated his attack on institutions,
not individuals; his greatest enemies were poverty, stupidity,
and cruelty. Chesterton, with whom he had as many "battles"
as with anyone, wrote in his autobiography:
81
It is not easy to dispute violently with a man
for twenty years, about sex, about sin, about sacra-
ments, about personal points of honour, about all
the most sacred and delicate essentials of exist-
ence, without sometime being irritated or feeling
that he hits unfair blows or employs discreditable
ingenuities. And I can testify that I have never
received a reply by Mr. Bernard Shaw that did not
leave me in a better and not a worse temper or
frame of mind; which did not seem to come out of
inexhaustible fountains of fairmindedness and in-
tellectual geniality; which did not savour somehow
that native largeness which the philOSOpher attri-
buted to the Magnanimous Man. It is necessary to
disagree with him as much as I do in order to ad-
mire him as much as I do; I am roud of him as a
foe even more than as a friend.
Shaw is invariably described as being extraordinarily
witty--but disagreement exists as to whether his sense of
humor was, in the long run, an advantage or a handicap. St.
John Ervine, in a broadcast on the day of Shaw's death, des-
cribed this side of Shaw and also his enigmatic nature:
He was a great laugher and he laughed with his
whole body. He threw his shoulders about while
the laughter ran up his long legs and threatened
to knock his head off. He was a kindly laugher.
There was not a sneer in his whole composition.
He set you thinking even when he was wrong,
as he frequently was; though he was always wrong
in a great and magnificent manner. He was a good
companion. His affectation of concept upset peo-
ple who failed to Observe that he laughed at it
more than anybody else. He was infinitely kind
and generous. He would do more for his friends
than his friends would do for themselves. It was
his strong sensitivity to other peOple's suffer-
ings which sometimes made him seem awkward and
unkind: he could keep control of himself when he
1G. K. Chesterton, Autobiography, pp. 227-28, cited in
Rattray, p. 256.
82
was distressed only by uttering the first flip-
pancy that came into his head. It was his eager-
ness to promote the general welfare that made a
socialist of him: no man known to me was more
individualistic in his nature. He hated untidi-
ness and he regarded ill-health and ignorance and
poverty and unmerited suffering as part of a
slovenly world he wished to abolish. He did not
withhold his hand even from his bitterest enemies.
Although Shaw had written earlier of the wisdom and
greatness which mankind could achieve of only he could live
long enough to learn and profit from his experience, during
his final years he often remarked that his time on earth was
near its end. The end came when, after injuries suffered in
a fall seemed to be healing, complications set in. Shaw's
death in 1950, at the age of ninety-four, was announced to
the world by F. G. Prince-White of the Daily News, who attach-
ed to the gate of Shaw's home a piece of paper with this
handwritten message:
Mr. Bernard Shaw passed
peacefully away at one minute
to five O'clock this morning,
November 2.
From the coffers of his
genius he enriched the
world.
l
Cited in Rattray, p. 295.
2
Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 877.
CHAPTER II
SHAW'S THEORIES OF PUBLIC SPEAKING
The volume of Shaw's Speaking, from the eighteen-
eighties when "for about twelve years. . . [he] sermonized
on Socialism at least three times a fortnight average"1 to
his late years, when he showed more interest in broadcasts
than in personal appearances, has been indicated in the
previous chapter. Noting the extent of his public speaking,
those familiar with Shaw's penchant for airing his views on
a variety of subjects could well expect him to expound upon
theories of public speaking; Shaw does not disappoint those
having such expectations.
While only one portion of his published work is
devoted specifically and exclusively to Shaw's comments on
public speaking, a chapter entitled "How I Became a Public
Speaker" in Sixteen Self Sketches, an investigation of other
published works reveals a much more complete theory of public
speaking than indicated by this one chapter; and the function
of this portion of this paper is to collect the many observa-
tions made by Shaw on public speaking.
1Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 98.
83
84
Although observations and evaluations made by those
who have heard Shaw speak will be incorporated at times into
this portion Of the study, emphasis will be upon Shaw's
recorded statements related to speaking. Such statements
by Shaw which furnish the bulk of information for this
chapter are from the following kinds of material: (1) Shaw's
critiques of speeches of others, (2) his advice1 to others,
and (3) comments Shaw made of his own speaking experiences.
Shaw's views on public speaking will be divided
into the following categories: (1) general comments about
public speaking, (2) preparation, (3) content, and (4) de—
livery. Although overlapping cannot be avoided due to the
difficulty of categorically separating each of these aspects
of public speaking, these are the basic divisions which will
be utilized here.
Shaw apparently was not hesitant about giving ad-
vice! After describing Shaw's helpfulness as a guest,
Pearson in A Full Length Portrait, p. 122, goes on to quote
one hostess's reservations about Shaw. "You invite him down
to your place because you think he will entertain your guests
with his brilliant conversation, and before you know where
you are he has chosen a school for your son, made your will
for you, regulated your diet, and assumed all the privileges
of your family solicitor, your housekeeper, your clergyman,
your doctor, your dressmaker, your hairdresser, and your
real estate agent. When he has finished with everybody else,
he incites the children to rebellion. And when he can find
nothing more to do, he goes away and forgets all about you."
2Although Shaw also commented about speaking on a
number of occasions in his dramatic writing, such statements
will not be incorporated into the study, since the intent of
the reference to public speaking may have been influenced by
the dramatic situation.
85
General Comments About Public Speaking
The general comments about public speaking which Shaw
made can be organized into the following categories: (1) the
value of public speaking to the individual, (2) public speak-
ing as a function of a free society, (3) the responsibilities
of a Speaker, and (4) the effectiveness of public speaking
in achieving a particular goal.
The value of public Speaking
to the individual
Public speaking, according to Shaw, has value for one
intending to become a dramatist, as remarks made to H. G.
Wells regarding the relationship of public speaking to play-
writing indicate.l Alongtflmasame line he stated at another
point, in a criticism of A. W. Pinero's play, The Notorious
Mrs. Ebbsmith, "I strongly recommend to him to air his ideas
a little in Hyde Park or 'the Iron Hall, St Luke's' before
he writes his next play."2 While these statements indicate
that he believed public speaking is valuable to a dramatist,
it must be pointed out that Shaw realized that such experience
is not always necessary for all playwrights:
It is significant that many successful writers
for the stage have never written for anything else.
1
See p. vii.
Bernard Shaw, Our Theatre in the Nineties (London:
Constable and Company, Limited, 1932), I, 64.
86
Others have excelled as public speakers or in con-
versation. . . . [But other playwrights] might have
succeeded if only they had understood that as the
pen and the viva vox are different instruments,
their parts must be scored accordingly.l
That Shaw believed the effects of his public speak-
ing experience to have permeated his dramatic writing has
been related in a number of sources. Not quite so common
are the references to its effect on his non-dramatic writing;
yet one finds these, also. In the Preface to Immaturipy,
written many years after the completion of that first novel
which was written before he undertook public speaking, Shaw
stated that in that early novel there was "nothing of the
voice of the public speaker in it: the voice that rings
through so much of my later work."2 Further, in his long
book explaining Socialism written in his later years, he
reflected, "I became a little rhetorical at the end of the
last chapter, as Socialists will when they have, like myself,
acquired the habit of public Speaking."3
Although Shaw did not state explicitly in either Of
these remarks that his writing improved after undertaking
public speaking, the intent of them seems in keeping with
Bentley's evaluation that the formality of his early prose
’ 1Bernard Shaw, Shaw on Theatre, ed. E. J. West
(New York: Hill and Wang, 1958), p. 166.
2Shaw, "Preface to Immaturity," Prefaces, p. 677.
3Bernard Shaw, The Intelligent Woman's Guide to
Socialism and Capitalism (New York: Brentano's Publishers,
1928): p. 145.
87
limited the expression of his ideas and that
the change came when Shaw the socialist speaker and
journalist began to write more nearly as he talked
. . . . Colloquialism Opened the gates to his humor,
his passion, his torrential Irish eloquence, his
polemics, to everything in fact that forms a part
of his prodigious dialectic skill.l
Shaw also believed public speaking to be of value to
individuals intending to do political work, although in such
statements he seemed to limit his advice to would-be Social-
ists, such as the individual cited earlier in this study.2
Additionally, throughout a paper addressed to new members of
the Fabian Society in 1892 are remarks indicating the value
of public speaking to an individual in becoming an effective
member of the Society.3 Among other things, Shaw believed,
for example, that speaking upon a subject could lead to a
better understanding of that subject:
Every Sunday I lectured on some subject which I
wanted to teach to myself; and it was not until
I had come to the point of being able to deliver
separate lectures, without notes, on Rent, Inter-
est, Profits, Wages, Toryism, Liberalism, Socialism,
Communism, Anarchism, Trade Unionism, Co-Operation
Democracy, the Division of Society in Classes, and
the Suitability of Human Nature to Systems of Just
Distribution, that I was able to handle Social
Democracy as it must be handled before it can be
1Eric Bentley, Bernard Shaw, 1856-1950 (Amended ed.;
New York: New Directions Books, 1957), pp. 213-14.
2See pp. vi-vii.
3Bernard Shaw, Essays in Fabian Socialism (London:
Constable and Company Limited, 1932, 1949), pp. 123—160.
88
preached in such a way as to present it to every 1
sort of man from his own particular point of View.
It should be kept in mind, however, that the situations to
which Shaw referred invariably included a discussion period
in which the speaker had to defend his views under close
questioning of others. Learning issues and arguments,
apparently, is most likely to occur in situations such as
were found at Fabian meetings:
We knew that a certain sort of oratory was useful
for "stoking up" public meetings; but we need
no stoking up, and, When any orator tried the
process on us, soon made him understand that he
was wasting his time and ours. I, for one, should
be very sorry to lower the intellectual standard
of the Fabian by making the atmosphere of its
public discussions the least bit more congenial
to stale declamation than it is at present. If
our debates are to be kept wholesome, they cannot
be too irreverent or too critical. And the ir-
reverence, which has become traditional with us,
comes down from those early days When we often
talked such nonsense that we could not help
laughing at ourselves.2
Furthermore, Shaw believed that once a person learned
to speak in public, other abilities useful to public life
would develOp:
My public speaking brought me a very necessary
qualification for political work: the committee
habit. Whatever Society I joined I was immediately
placed on the executive committee. At first I did
What authors usually do in their Bohemian anarchism
and individualism. When they are defeated on any
issue they resign. I did this When the Land Restora-
Shaw, Essays in Fabian Socialism, p. 144.
2Shaw, Essays in Fabian Socialism, p. 128.
89
tion League refused to add Socialism to its pro-
gram on my suggestion. I never did it again.
I soon learnt the rule Never Resign. I learnt
also that committees of agitators are always
unanimous in the conviction that Something Must
Be Done, but very vague as to What. They talk
and talk and can come to no conclusion. The
member who has something definite to propose,
and who keeps it up his sleeve until the rest
are completely bothered, is then master of the
situation even when nobody quite agrees with him.
I is that or nothing; and Something Must Be Done.
This is how a man in a minority of one becomes a
leader.1
Thus, Shaw's comments reveal that public speaking could be
useful to an individual whether he wanted to become a writer
or to make useful contributions in civic life.
Public speaking as a function
of a free society
Since Shaw's admiration of dictators and espousal
of restrictions of individuals in totalitarian societies
in the nineteen-thirties received wide publicity, the con-
cept of "free society" must first be examined. Although
his approval of certain aspects of dictatorial methods can-
not be ignored, such comments came late in his life after
many Of his statements on the function of Speech in a free
society had been made. Furthermore, even though it may be
pointed out that Shaw continued to speak of speech as a
function of free society after his advocacy of dictatorships
1Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 103.
II.
his
90
offers support for the dominance of belief in such freedom,
a more cogent explanation for this contradictory position
assumed by Shaw may be that described by Bentley, who
believes that such action was part of Shaw's technique to
reform his adOpted country.
Certainly his most noble characteristic is his
passionate and lifelong attempt to reform the
country in which he pretends to be an aloof
foreigner. If Shaw finds something to admire
in one of his quick trips abroad (Russia is the
Obvious example) he uses it as a stick to beat
England with. If he finds something in a foreign
country to dislike he is quick to add that you
mustn't imagine England is any better. . . .1
Finally, Shaw's belief in a free society, deSpite his ques-
tioning of the effectiveness of democratic processes, is
implicitly supported by the comments of the function of
speech Which follow.
The view that speech performs an important function
in a free society is perhaps most clearly stated by Shaw in
a Fabian essay:
Our whole theory of freedom of speech and opinion
for all citizens rests, not on the assumption that
everybody is right, but on the certainty that every-
body is wrong on some point on which somebody else
is right, so that there is a public danger in allow-
ing anybody to go unheard.2
Moreover, he maintained this position in later years when
he wrote:
1
Bentley, p. 25.
Shaw, Essays in Fabian Socialism, p. 116.
91
The barrister who in court strives "to make the
worse appear the better cause" has been held up
as a stock example of the dishonesty of repre-
senting for money. Nothing could be more unjust.
It is agreed, and necessarily agreed, that the
best way of learning the truth about anything is
not to listen to a vain attempt at an impartial
and disinterested statement, but to hear every-
thing that can possibly be said fOr it, and then
everything that can possibly be said against it,
by skilled pleaders on behalf of the interested
parties on both sides.1
This conviction that all sides be given the Oppor-
tunity to be heard is further reflected in his attitude
toward a properly conducted meeting which should allow for
questioning Of the speaker by those in the audience. In
addition to frequently stating his approval of the Oppor-
tunity offered by such situations, Shaw disapproved of
societies which did not allow for this aspect of speaking.
This is evident in the remarks he made of a meeting of the
Wagner Society where there was "no Opportunity whatever of
raising any question connected with the evening or of the
society."2
Another evidence of Shaw's belief in the important
function of Speech in a free society is his participation
in the â€Bloody Sunday" riots, which had free speech as one
of its rallying points. Moreover, Shaw's View that a speaker
can Operate to the fullest of his responsibilities within a
1Shaw, The Intelligent Woman's Guide to Socialism
and Capitalism, pp. 202—203.
2Shaw, London Music in 1888—89, p. 324.
92
free society, where not only the designated speaker but any-
one in the audience could state his case, can be inferred
from his often-stated preference for Open-air meetings.
There are the audience is free to come and go, free to inter-
rupt a speaker if he so elects; the burden is upon the speaker
not only to hold attention but also to answer any and all
Objections raised by the audience.
Within this context of free speech in a free society,
the speaker may maximize his arguments in order to make the
audience aware of a problem. As Shaw often said, ". . . in
this world if you do not say a thing in an irritating way,
you may just as well not say it at all, since nobody will
trouble themselves about anything that does not trouble them."2
Overstatement whenever necessary, combined with a system
allowing for all points of View to be expressed, provides,
in addition, an excellent learning situation. ". . . No
controverSï¬ï¬‚.subject can be taught dogmatically. He who
1In his nineties Shaw still looked back fondly on his
experiences as an Open air speaker. In Sixteen Self Sketches,
pp. 98-99, he wrote: "One of my best speeches was delivered
in Hyde Park in torrents of rain to six policemen sent to
watch me, plus only the secretary of the Society that had
asked me to speak, who held an umbrella over me. I made up
my mind to interest those policemen, though as they were on
duty to listen to me, their usual practice, after being con-
vinced that I was harmless, was to pay no further attention.
I entertained them for more than an hour. I can still see
their waterproof capes shining in the rain when I shut my
eyes."
2
Shaw, Our Theatre in the Nineties, II, 85—86.
93
knows only the Official side of a controversy knows less
than nothing of its nature."1
Thus, Shaw appears to hold the view that a recipro-
cal situation should exist: society must provide the Oppor-
tunity for free speech, and public speaking performs an im-
portant function in a free society.
The pesponsibilities of a speaker
While Shaw believed that a speaker is free to over-
state in a situation where all sides could eventually be
heard, he did not neglect the issue Of a speaker's respon-
sibilities. For example, although he had no hesitancy in
attempting to refute any other platform lecturer, he held
that as an experienced speaker he should not take advantage
of an untried Opponent. "I never challenged anyone to de-
bate publicly with me. It seemed to me an unfair practice
for a seasoned public speaker to challenge a comparative
novice to a duel with tongues, of no more value than any
other sort of duel."2
In addition, implicit in Shaw's preferences for Open-
air meetings or for well—conducted group sessions is, ap-
parently, the point of view that the Speaker thus fulfills
lShaw, "Preface to Misalliance," Prefaces p. 59.
2Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 101.
94
a responsibility to his audience by being subjected to direct
questions. That meetings should be conducted in a way re-
quiring a Speaker to meet such conditions is evident in his
complaint of the Wagner Society, where "nobody present seemed
to have the least idea of how such meetings should be con-
ducted. There was no chairman, no orderly procedure, no
Opportunity whatever of raising any question. . ."1
While a first requisite is a properly conducted
meeting, the reSponsibility then is directly upon the speaker
to respect procedures of public meetings, as he revealed in
a letter written to H. G. Wells:
. ...When you address a public meeting, you must
do so according to the forms of public meeting, and
not publicly insult the chairman by not only assum-
ing his duties and privileges, but actually thrust-
ing him bodily out of his place. You may do that
with impunity with worms who know no more about
"order" than you do. But have you any idea what
would happen to you if you tried it on with, say,
Lord Courtney, or with the Speaker of the House of
Commons? Learn, rash egotist, that if you were a
thousand H. G. Wellses, there is one sancrosanct
person who is greater than you all, and that is
the chairman of a public meeting. TO be ignorant
Of this, to fail in reSpect to The Chair, is the
lowest depth of misdemeanour to which a public man
can fall.
Therefore, in addition to responsibilities which stem
from careful attention to preparation, content, and delivery,
a ————v q
1
Shaw, London Music in 1888-89, p. 324.
2Letter quoted in Ervine, p. 418.
95
Which will be described later, Shaw believed that a speaker
should meet these obligations in the public speaking situation.
The effectiveness of public speaking
in achieving a particular goal
If Shaw believed that public speaking in a free
society is valuable, and indeed necessary, provided all sides
can eventually be heard, the question then arises, "What
evaluation, if any, did he make of the effects Of speaking
in general and his own in particular in persuading audiences?"l
Although an examination of Shaw's writings reveals
no conclusive statement regarding the effectiveness of a
public speaker in persuading audiences to accept the ideas
he puts forth, his actions and the advice already cited
indicate that in his early and middle years, at least, he
put great faith in the usefulness Of public speaking in
changing society. While it is difficult to pinpoint the
time at which Shaw began to have doubts about the effective-
ness of persuasive speaking, Joad believes that sometime be—
ï¬i
lEvaluations made by others of Shaw's persuasive
ability vary from ". . . Shaw's indefatigable political
thinking on national and international questions has had
no perceptible results" by Jacques Barzun, "Bernard Shaw
in Twilight," Kronenberger (ed), p. 175; to "The striking
socialist victories in the November 1945 elections were
not the outcome of a sudden volte face, but the cumulative
result of thousands of speeches and publications during the
past few decades, in the making of which Bernard Shaw's num-
erous Fabian Tracts and other works. . . have played an im-
portant part," by A. Emil Davies, "G. B. S. and Local Gov-
ernment," Stephen Winsten (ed.), G. B. S. 90; Aspects of
Bernard Shaw's Life Work (New York: Dodd, Mead & Company,
1946), p. 157.
96
tween the beginning of the century and World War I, Shaw
began to falter in his faith in educating people (public
speaking being one of the ways of bringing about that edu-
cation) and in democracy.1 Supporting Joad's point of view
is Shaw's 1917 statement: ". . . I realize as I never did
before what a mistake I have made in trying all my life to
argue and amuse the English out of their follies instead of
simply kicking them."2 Further, Blanche Patch, who became
his secretary in 1920, stated that, to her knowledge, never
"did he ever speak in an election campaign. He was Often
asked to do so, but he always replied that his electioneer-
ing days were over, sometimes adding a crisp note to the
effect that, in the days When he did speak, 'all my candi-
dates failed to get in.'"3 Finally, we have a remark made
by Shaw in his nineties "correcting" the comments of an
early biographer, Henry Charles Duffin, stating: "I never
'realized the futility of preaching to empty pews.‘ The
pews were never empty: what I did realize was the futility
of preaching to full ones. Crowded meetings butter no
parsnips."
1C. E. M. Joad, Shaw (London: Gollancz, 1949), p.
149.
2Bernard Shaw, The Matter with Irgland, ed. with an
intro. Dan HJ Laurence and David H. Greene (New York: Hill
and Wang, 1962), p. 136.
3Blanche Patch, Thirty Years With G. B. S. (New York:
Dodd, Mead, 1951), p. 204.
4Shaw, Sixteen§e1f Sketches, p. 160.
97
Thus we see that Shaw had doubts--serious ones--
of a public speaker's ability to persuade audiences to his
point of view. On the other hand, there appears the reluc-
tance of Shaw to give up Opportunities to speak and, perhaps,
thereby convert some in his audience to his point of view.
It is true that some critics have said that Shaw's continued
acceptance of speaking engagements was merely the result Of
his desire for publicity. Without completely eliminating
this as a factor, it should nevertheless be pointed out that
Shaw found speaking engagements physically taxing in his
later years. Furthermore, he expressed a wish that he not
be remembered only as a playwright: ". . . for every play
I have made hundreds of speeches. . ."1 Also, Winsten
reports that during the 1945 elections Shaw listened to the
speeches of candidates on the radio, "awarded marks for
delivery, sense and sincerity,"2 and stated, "Well, I've
lived to see the paradox of yesterday become the platitude
of today. There must have been some intrinsic merit in what
I say because my sentences sound equally good on the lips of
Attlee, Eden, Bevin and Dalton."3 This observation attributed
1Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 159.
2Stephen Winsten, Days With Bernard Shaw (New York:
Vanguard Press, 1949), p. 220.
3Winsten, Days With Bernard Shaw, p. 221.
98
to Shaw indicates that even in his late years Shaw looked
back upon his speaking experiences as having some positive
effects.
In summary thus far, then, we can say that Shaw
believed in the value of public speaking to an individual:
it seemed to help his own writing style; it could be parti-
cularly useful, though not essential, to a dramatic writer;
and it was valuable to those aspiring to enter public life.
Moreover, he viewed public speaking as important in a free
society, provided certain conditions were met, including
that of a speaker's accepting his responsibilities in the
public speaking situation. Finally, his expressed view
toward the persuasive effect of public speaking, particu-
larly his own, upon an audience is often pessimistic even
if somewhat inconclusive.
Preparation
Although Shaw does not appear to have described the
step—by—step process which he followed in preparing a speech,
an investigation of his writing indicates that he held under-
lying assumptions about the nature of public Speaking and
advocated a number of factors of preparation. The material
from Shaw's critiques of others, his advice concerning speak-J
ing, and reports of his own experiences relating to prepara—
tion will be presented in the following order: (1) underlying
99
assumptions related to preparation; (2) analysis of the aud-
ience, including time and place; (3) selection of the subject;
(4) getting the necessary information; and (5) preparing for
delivery.
Undeplyingyassumptions
related to ppepgration
One underlying assumption Which has a bearing on
theories of preparation and which is held by Shaw is that
public speaking is a learned art. His own determination to
learn to be a public speaker and his exhortations to others
to achieve competence in speaking in public have already been
mentioned. Although Shaw's success in teaching others to
Speak may be open to further study, his belief that such can
be done is epitomized in a statement to H. G. Wells: "I
will make a decent public man of you yet, and an effective
public speaker, if I have to break your heart in the process."1
One statement, however, does contradict the point of view
that public speaking is learned; in an evaluation of Henry
George, Shaw referred to him as a "born orator."2 For the
most part, however, Shaw's statements reveal that he believed
that an individual could learn to speak in public and that
1Cited in Ervine, p. 419.
2Letter to Hamlin Garland dated December 29, 1904,
cited in Henderson, Man of the Centupy, p. 215.
100
in—born talent was not a prerequisite.
A second assumption, closely related to the first,
is that actual experience in public speaking is the best
method of learning the art. Of many statements made to this
effect, the following is typical:
I do not hesitate to say that all our best
lecturers have two or three old lectures at the
back of every single point in their best new
speeches; and this means that they have spent a
certain number of years plodding away at foot-
ling little meetings and dull discussions, dog-
gedly placing these before all private engage-
ments, however tempting. A man's Socialistic
acquisitiveness must be keen enough to make him
actually prefer spending two or three nights a
week in speaking and debating, or in picking up
social information even in the most dingy and
scrappy way, to going to the theatre, or dancing
or drinking, or even sweethearting. if he is to
become a really competent prOpagandist—-unless,
of course, his daily work is of such nature as
to be in itself a training for political life;
and that, we know, is the case with very few
of us indeed. It is at such lecturing and de-
bating work, and on squalid little committees
with perhaps a deputation to the mayor thrown in
once in a blue moon or so, that the ordinary
Fabian workman or clerk must qualify for his
future seat on the Town Council, the School Board,
or perhaps in the Cabinet.1
While this is true it seems erroneous to conclude that Shaw
believed that the mere repetition of platform appearances issuf—
ficient to learn public speaking: "I must not leave incipient
orators to suppose that my technique as a speaker was acquired
by practice alone. Practice only cured my nervousness, and
Shaw, Essays in Fabian Socialism, p. 145.
101
accustomed me to speak to multitudes as well as to private
persons."1
Since Shaw admits that practice alone was not suffi-
cient to develop public speaking techniques, the question
which arises at this point is: did Shaw read and study any
body of rhetorical theory available in his day, and did he
feel that such would be helpful to a future speaker?
While Shaw in material examined gave no credit to
anything that he might have read dealing with any aspect of
rhetorical theory, this does not discount the probability of
his having read such material nor of the possibility of his
views being influenced by such study.2 That Shaw spent hours
reading every day in the British Museum for a number of years
1
Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 104.
2Although Nichols, p. 126, states that in answer to
direct questions, Shaw denied having consulted any rhetori-
cal theorists, certain aspects of Shaw's reply must be con-
sidered before drawing conclusions from it. First, Shaw was
93 when he wrote the letter; in other correspondence from
this period found in biographies Shaw complained of faulty
memory: it would be surprising if he remembered the title
of every book he read as a young man. Second, Shaw may have
preferred to reply in an overstated fashion in order to stress
the value of practical experience; such reaction to question-
naires is not unprecedented. Third, the wording of the
questions as cited by Nichols ("consu1t," "lessons," "study")
would tend to elicit immediate negation from Shaw, who re—
peatedly spoke of the worthlessness Of formal education.
Finally, as Bentley points out (Chaps. l, 2), Shaw Often
attached very Specific meanings to words; thus he may have
"read" certain books on rhetorical theory even though he
did not "consult" them.
102
is well-known; yet only a relatively few authors or books have
been noted in detail by either Shaw or his biographers; works
on rhetorical theory could be among his unnamed reading
activities. Statements made by Shaw reveal that the works
of Aristotle and Plato were familiar to him, even though he
did not refer to them in connection with public speaking.
Furthermore, scattered throughout his writing are such terms
as "syllogism," "§_priori," "reductio §d_ab§grdum," "prima
facie," "peroration," "extemporaneous," "articulation,"
"Delsartism"--terms associated in some manner with aspects
Of rhetorical theory.
While it is possible that he became familiar with
such terms solely through speaking and listening or through
"non-rhetorical" reading, the strong possibility also exists
that at some time an investigation of rhetorical theory was
a part of his own preparation process in becoming a public
speaker. The only conclusion that can be made, however, is
that Shaw primarily credited his own practical experiences
and Observations for his knowledge and skill regarding public
speaking and for the theories which he propounded. Perhaps
in addition to practice, the understanding of the theories
of preparation, content, and delivery was a requisite for
the public speaker; but Shaw did not suggest that speakers
study rhetorical theorists to learn the art.
103
Analysis of the audience, including time andyplace
As will be shown later, Shaw spoke often of the need
for the speaker to consider the audience. Although he did
not use the term "audience analysis" as such when speaking
of speech preparation, recognition of the nature of a parti-
cular audience before speaking is found throughout a letter
entitled, "How to Lecture on Ibsen," to Janet Achurch, a
well-known actress of the day.1 Preliminary audience analy-
sis is also implied in the following advice to new Fabians:
When we Eabiansj go to a Radical Club to inveigh
against t e monOpolies of land and capital, we
know perfectly that we are preaching no new doc-
trine, and that the Old hands were listening to
such denunciations twenty-five years before we
were born, and are only curious to know whether
we have anything new in the way of a practical
remedy.
Furthermore, at another time he related difficulties he had
as a public speaker Which he attributed to failure to con-
sider sufficiently the nature of the audience:
I was so full Of it [Socialism] at first that
I dragged it in by the ears on all occasions, and
presently so annoyed an audience at South Place
that for the only time in my life I was met with
a demonstration of impatience. I took the hint
so rapidly & apprehensively that no great harm
was done; but I still remember it as an unpleasant
& mortifying discovery that there is a limit even
to the patience of that poor helpless long-suffer-
ing animal, the public, with political speakers.
It had never occurred before; and it never oc-
curred again.
1Shaw, Shaw on Theatre, pp. 53-58 passim.
2
3Letter to Henderson, January 17, 1905, quoted in
Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 223.
Shaw, Essays in Fabian Socialism, p. 153.
104
He considered time and place of speaking, as well
as audience background and attitudes, to be a part of the
preparation process, although seldom referring to such
matters except in terms of the avoidance of certain types of
situations. Since he particularly disliked after-dinner
speeches, his letter to Janet Achurch telling her how to
prepare for Speaking included the suggestion: "If there
is any artistic club that you can address, get them to ask
you to address them. Don't let it be a dinner, because
after-dinner speaking is difficult and inconvenient; and
the audience is always half drunk."1 That prior knowledge
of the physical aspects of the audience situation is an
understood prerequisite for the speaker can be inferred
from a comment found in a criticism of a dramatic production
which had been held in a large hall: ". . . it was plain
that the actors were not eminent after—dinner speakers, and
had consequently never received in that room the customary
warning to Speak to the second pillar on the right Of the
2
door, on pain of not being heard."
Selection of the subject
Shaw had comparatively little to say about selecting
the subject for a speech, although on this point, also, we
lShaw, Shaw on Theatre, p. 53.
2Shaw, Our Theatre in the Nineties, III, 243.
105
do find a few comments. His belief that a speaker should
be free to select his speech subject was a part of his
refusal to accept fees for speaking, a practice referred
to elsewhere in this paper.1 A second point he made about
a speaker and his choice of subject is that the choice made
is dependent on the speaker's knowledge and experience. It
is in this light that he advised Miss Achurch in the prev-
iously—mentioned letter:
First, you hope nobody expects that you are
going to deliver a lecture. For that, it is
necessary to be a critic, an essayist, a student
of literature [and] if people want a lecture on
the drama or the stage, they must not come to
you for it, but to one of the dramatic critics.
The subject that you are really going to talk
about is yourself—~a favorite subject of yours.2
Getting the necessary information
Although Shaw advised others to Speak on subjects
familiar to them, there seems to be no evidence that Shaw
ever turned down an Opportunity to Speak due to his feeling
that he did not have the necessary background! There is
evidence, however, that Shaw's own process of preparation
included some research for the subject of his speech and
that much of it occurred as part of general seeking out of
information rather than preparation for a particular speech:
1
See p. 42.
2Shaw, Shaw on Theatre, p. 54.
106
his reading, his participation in study clubs, his testing
of ideas through informal discussion, which have already
been mentioned.
While he read and studied widely, in one article
Shaw minimized the research he did:
I am not a complete apriorist, because I always
start from a single fact or incident Which strikes
me as significant. But one is enough. I never
collect authorities nor investigate conditions.
I just deduce what happened from my flair for
human nature, knowing that if necessary I can
find plenty of documents and witnesses to bear
me out in any possible conclusion.1
In contrast, however, we have the following infor-
mation from the 1899 program of Antony and CleOpatra. Al-
though the illustration is concerned with playwriting, it
seems indicative of a work habit:
The Play follows history as closely as stage
exigencies permit. Critics should consult Manetho
and the Egyptian Monuments, Herodotus. Diodorus,
Strabo (Book 17), Plutarch, Pomponius Mela, Pliny,
Tacitus, Appian Of Alexandria. and perhaps,
Ammianus Marcellinus.
Ordinary spectators, if unfamiliar with the
ancient tongues, may refer to Mommsen, Warde Fowler,
Mr. St. George Stock's Introduction to the 1908
Clarendon Press edition of Caesar's Gallic Wars and
Murray's Handbook of Egypt. Many of these authori—
ties have consulted their own imaginations, more
or less. The author has done the same.
Bernard Shaw, "The Webbs and Social Evolution,"
New York Times Book Review, November 18, 1945, pp. 1, 19-
20, quoted in Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 335.
2
Cited in Rattray, p. 135.
107
Similarly, a reviewer in The Times Literary Supplement stated:
The enormous amount of information on which Mr.
Shaw bases his Opinions has time and again proved
to be of scrupulous accuracy. That his versa-
tility of thought owes both its vigour and practi-
cal character to what must be ultimately described
as imaginative power is perhaps obvious; but that
fact should not distract attention from the variety
of his scientific studies and the breadth of his
knowledge of history, art, and philosophy.1
Further, Chesterton, who had appeared on the platform with
Shaw and debated against him, wrote:
. . . His apparent exaggerations are generally much
better backed up by knowledge than would appear
from their nature. He can lure his enemy on with
fantasies and then overwhelm him with facts. . . .
[After hearing a wild exaggeration a scientist
would} engage in a controversy with Shaw about
(let us say) vivisection, and discover to his
horror that Shaw really knew a great deal about
the subject, and could pelt him with expert
witnesses and hospital reports.
Thus, although Shaw said little about research as a
Specific part of the speech preparation process, there is
evidence that Shaw himself did a considerable amount of
research, if not for a particular Speech, at least upon
general tOpics.
Although commenting extensively on the nature of
Speech content, which will be described in a later portion
of this paper, Shaw had little to say about how a speaker
1
Cited in Rattray, p. 307.
2 .
G. K. Chesterton, George Bernard Shaw (reprinted
ed; New York: Hill and Wang, Inc., 1956), pp. 50-51.
108
goes about deciding What to say.1 He did write extensively,
however, on preparation for delivery.
Prepaping for delivery
From his earliest speaking attempts Shaw relied upon
extemporaneous delivery, jotting down a few notes on slips
of paper; he described his nervousness during these early
attempts at extemporaneous speaking:
During the Speech of the debater I resolved to
follow, my heart used to beat as painfully as
a recruit's going under fire for the first time.
I could not use notes: when I looked at the
paper in my hand I could not collect myself to
decipher a word. And of the four or five points
that were my pretext for this ghastly practice
I invariably forgot the best.
His practice, then, for participation in discussions was to
concentrate upon a few main points which he noted on pieces
of paper.
At first he apparently used this procedure only for
relatively short speeches. He was converted to extempor-
aneous speaking for all situations after being asked to
address a Radical Club at Woolwich, one Of his first invi-
tations to appear on a platform:
At first I thought of reading a written lecture;
for it seemed hardly possible to Speak for an hour
1In his letter to Janet Achurch he told her what to
say to particular audiences, not how to go about this phase
of the preparation process.
2
Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 94.
109
without text when I had hitherto spoken for ten
minutes or so only in debates. But if I were to
lecture formally on Socialism for an hour, writing
would be impossible for want of time: I must
extemporize. . . . I spoke for an hour easily.
and from that time always extemporized.
Although Shaw has referred to making a few notes in
preparation for his extemporaneous speeches, apparently he
Often did not use notes at all. He secretary, Blanche
Patch, wrote of: "The occasion [was] for an appeal for the
Jews of Eastern EurOpe, and Shaw, seventy-four at the time,
took it so seriously that I got his Speech to type out for
him beforehand, an unusual request, for generally he spoke
without notes."2 This also reveals, of course, that on some
occasions he spoke from manuscript.
Shaw was not consistent in his manner of preparation
for delivery of radio addresses. Reference to one hand-
written manuscript for a radio speech3 indicates that on
least one occasion he wrote his speech, but a reliance upon
"verbatim reports" in several radio addresses available plus
an internal reference in one radio address4 makes it appear
that even in radio addresses the extemporaneous method of
delivery was often used.
lShaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, pp. 97-98.
2patch, pp. 234-35.
"Extraordinary Shaw Collection of Dr. T. E. Hanley,"
The Shaw Bulletin, I (May, 1952), 13.
4Shaw, Shaw on Theatre, pp. 196-97.
110
The importance of rehearsal as part of the prepara-
tion process was not discounted. Winsten reports that Shaw
told him, "I am the most spontaneous speaker in the world
because every word, every gesture and every retort have been
1
carefully rehearsed." This need not mean that the speech
was rehearsed in detail, nor did Shaw give any indication
this was his practice. On the other hand, he mentioned
often that a speaker should practice the use of the voice
and articulation. At various times he attributed his own
pleasant voice to the influence of his mother or to Vande-
leur Lee; in the following instance he credits Richard Deck,
an Alsatian opera singer and pupil of Delsarte:
. . . He taught me that to be intelligible in
public the speaker must relearn the alphabet with
every consonant separately and explosively articu-
lated, and foreign vowels distinguished from
British diphthongs. Accordingly I practised the
alphabet as a singer practises scales until I was
in no danger of saying "loheeryelentheethisharpointed
sword" instead of "Lo here I_1end ghee £hi§§_§harp
pointed sword," nor imagine that When imitating the
broadest dialects articulation is less to be studied
than in classical declamation. Lessons in elocution
should always be taken by public Speakers when a
phonetically competent teacher is available. But
art must conceal its artificiality; and the old
actor who professes to teach acting, and knows
nothing of phonetic speech training, is to be
avoided like the plague.2
The individual intending to improve his voice should
1
Winsten, Days With Bernard Shaw, p. 131.
2
Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, pp. 104-105.
111
not rely,on imitation, for each speaker has his own personal
mannerisms and merely to mimic a good voice could be dis-
1
astrous. Further, the speaker should not try to change
his native dialect, but merely to rid his speaking of vul-
garities:
All countries and districts send us parliamentary
speakers Who have cultivated the qualities of their
native dialect and corrected its faults whilst aim-
ing at something like a standard purity and clear-
ness of speech. Take Mr Gladstone for instance.
For his purposes as an orator he has studied his
speech as carefully and with as great powers Of
application as any actor. But he never lost, and
never wanted to lose, certain features of his speech
which stamp him as a North-countryman. When Mr T. P.
O'Connor delivers a speech, he does not inflict on
us the vulgarities of Beggar's Bush, but he pre-
serves for us all the music of Galway, though he
does not say "Yis" for "Yes" like a Galway peas-
ant any more than he says "Now" (Nah—oo) for "No"
like a would-be smart London actor. It is so with
all good speakers off the stage. Among good speakers
the Irishman Speaks like an Irishman, the Scotsman
like a Scotsman, the American like an American,
and so on.2
Instead, the individual should learn to improve his voice
by develOping his own ear; improvement "must be checked by
his own ear, not his master's. There is no use in getting
other peOple to listen to him: he must listen to himself
with his Whole soul until his ear has grown exquisitely
sensitive to minute Shades of intonation and pronunciation
until he cannot go wrong without literally hurting himself."
._,_..
lShaw, London Music in issa-ag, p. 266.
2Shaw, Our Theatre in the Nineties, III, 108.
3Shaw, London Music in 1888-89, p. 265.
112
Furthermore, there was awareness of questionable
elocutionary training, together with the conviction that
the speaker must be careful in studying voice and articu—
lation:
One day when I was expatiating to a friend on
the importance of teaching peOple to speak well,
he asked me dubiously whether I did not find that
most men became humbugs when they learnt elocu-
tion. I could not deny it. The elocutionary
man is the most insufferable of human beings.
But I do not want anybody to become elocutionary.
If your face is not clean, wash it: dont cut your
head off. If your diction is slipshod and impure,
correct and purify it: dont throw it away and
make shift for the rest of your life with a
hideous affectation of platformy accent, false
emphases, unmeaning pauses, aggravating slowness,
ill-conditioned gravity, and perverse resolution
to "get it from the chest" and make it sound as
if you got it from the cellar. . . . Simply edu-
cate your ear until you are fairly skilful at
phonetics, and leave the rest to your good sense.
These, then, are Shaw's theories regarding the
preparation of a speech gleaned from his own writings on the
subject. In his views on speech as a learned art, on the
role of audience analysis, on the need to know your subject
well, on the advisability of extemporaneous delivery, and on
the importance of clear articulation he does not differ
markedly from material presented in standard beginning speech
texts of today. He has almost nothing to say directly about
Invention and Style as part of the Speech preparation process,
but one cannot help but recognize that these are probably
lShaw, London Music in 1888-89, pp. 314-15.
113
the most difficult aspects of Speech preparation for even
the expert public speaking theorist to describe.
9.922222
As Shaw's critiques, advice, and his own descriptions
of his platform appearances are examined to determine his
theories which are concerned with speech content, the follow-
ing divisions emerge: (l) audience analysis, (2) statement
of contentions and attention factors, (3) develOping an
argument, and (4) refutation. Although obviously these cate-
gories are not always mutually exclusive, they provide a con-
venient method for dealing with the complexities of Speech
content.
Audience analysis
Even though Shaw's theories of audience analysis as
a factor in determining and evaluating Speech content are
given a prominent place in this portion of the study, an
important characteristic regarding his statements about
public Speaking Should be kept in mind: Shaw tends to re-
late all comments on public speaking to the audience. Whether
he is giving advice on Speech preparation, describing speech
content, or criticizing delivery, references to the audience
permeate his remarks. Even though Shaw never explicitly
states such a theory, implicit in his actions and statements
is his belief in the Speech act as a process having the
114
Aristotelian Speech, speaker, audience triangle; and the
limitations of categorically separating the various aspects
of speaking must be kept in mind. Although this permeation
Of the importance of the audience1 through all phases of
speech theory makes it difficult to treat audience analysis
as an entity, certain theories can be discerned which are
more concerned with the role audience analysis plays in
determining content than with any other phase of speech
theory; and these constitute the basis for this portion of
the chapter. Shaw appears to hold the following beliefs
regarding audiences, each of Which plays a part in deter-
mining the content of speeches: (l) the speaker must realize
the nature of audiences in general; (2) the speaker must
realize the nature of specific audiences; and (3) the
speaker must not-misinterpret immediate audience reactions.
The gpeaker must realize the napgggyof audiences in
general. -- Actually, Shaw went further than to advise a
Speaker to know his audience: he had definite views on the
nature Of audiences--at least the audiences of the English-
Speaking world. A speaker should realize, he believed, that
most audiences are composed of emotional individuals, misled
W V , i w '—
1Bentley, p. 24, puts it this way: "What he says
is always determined by the thought: What can I do to this
audience? not by the thought: what is the most objective
statement about this subject?â€
115
by their illusions, who must be awakened by extreme means and
must be forced to think. A few of Shaw's oft-expressed
statements on this theme serve to give evidence of this
analysis. For example, he stated, ". . . intellectual
subtlety is not . . . [the Englishmen's] strong point.) In
dealing with them you must make them believe that you are
appealing to their brains when you are really appealing to
their senses and feelings."1 At another point he said:
My experience as an enlightener, which is consid-
erable, is that what is wrong with the average
citizen is not altogether deficient political
capacity. It is largely ignorance of facts, cre-
ating a vacuum into which all sorts of romantic
antiquarian junk and cast-Off primitive religion
rushes.
At still another point the relationship of his general analy-
sis of the audience to the content of the Speech is brought
out: "The Socialist platform and my journalistic pulpits
involved a constant and most provocative forcing of peOple
to face the practical consequences of theories and beliefs,
and to draw mordant contrasts between what they professed or
[what their theories involved and their life and conduct."3
""Fhr£herm6re, Shaw seemed to think that Other Speakers
would profit from his analysis of the audience in general.
ï¬ _ v—ywï¬
1Shaw, OuryTheatre in the Nineties, III, 323-24.
2
Shaw, "Preface to Geneva," Complete Prefaces, p.
879. .
3Letter to Henderson, quoted in Henderson, Man of
the Century, p. 275.
116
For example, although praising William Morris's essays on
Socialism, he believed Morris's speeches to lack effective-
ness because the arguments as he gave them were too subtle
for English audiences.l At another time he reviewed a lec-
ture by Andrew Lang:
The lecture was, Of course, only a Daily News
article drawn out to an hour's duration. The
ladies giggled resolutely all through, knowing
Mr Lang to be a reputed wit of the first water;
but there was not much laughter. The fact is
that, though it may require surgical Operation
to get a joke into the head of a Scotsman (Mr
Lang is a Scotsman), it requires a sledge-
hammer to knock one into an English audience.
Thus, Shaw not only believed that a speaker must know
the general nature of all audiences but he had definite views
on that nature, views which were part of the theory under
which he believed speakers should Operate. Coupled with
this belief that audiences are complacent and have to be
jolted out of their lethargy, however, was a belief that
this did not give a Speaker unlimited freedom and that he
must respect his audience. For example, Pearson reports
that in one instance in the writing of his biography of
Shaw, he questioned G. B. S. about some anecdotes of him as
a Speaker. The reply was: "These are pure fiction. They
,1
Bernard Shaw, "William Morris As I Knew Him" in
May Morris, William Morris: Artisty_Writery Socialist, II
(Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1936), pp. xxxviii-xxxix.
2
Shaw, London Music in 1888-89, p. 271.
117
suggest that I habitually trifled with my audiences, which
I pgyg; did. I knew better."1
Whether in practice Shaw followed this theory of
respect based on audience analysis is open to question, for
statements made by those who heard him speak are contra-
dictory.2 He did, however, seem to believe in the impor-
tance of showing respect for an audience by mentioning it
in his letter to Miss Achurch when giving advice on how to
prepare a lecture.3
His belief in the theory is further underscored by
two incidents described by Shaw. One«occurred while giving
V— V
lHesketh Pearson, G. B. S;, A Postscript (lst ed.;
New York: Harper, 1950), p. 60.
2Perhaps the lack of agreement on whether in prac-
tice Shaw showed respect for his audience was due to indi—
vidual reaction to factors other than content. For example,
Joad, p. 30, states: "This melodious voice was very plea-
sant to listen to, so pleasant that it enabled its owner to
make assertions which, coming from any other speaker, would
have been immediately challenged, and to rebuke and even on
occasion outrageously to insult his audience without causing
a riot. You took the rebukes and the insults in your stride,
because the intonation in Shaw's voice took them so Obvious-
1y for granted. The voice was so fresh, to easy, so bland,
so confidential, as if it wanted you to share its confidences,
its intonation conveyed so persuasive a suggestion of there
being no deception, of Shaw having, as it were, nothing
Whatever up his oratorical sleeve that, had there been all
the deception in the world, you would nevertheless not only
have been taken in, but would have been glad to have been
taken in.
"At the same time the voice was indifferent, casual,
almost nonchalant, as if Shaw did not care a row of pins
whether you agreed with him or not."
3
Shaw, Shaw on Theatre, p. 57.
118
testimony before a committee investigating stage censorship,
When the discussion became rather heated. Shaw later wrote
of his difficulty of keeping his temper before an audience:
". . . the majority of the Committee made no attempt to con-
ceal the fact that they were wildly angry with me; and I,
though my public experience and skill in acting enabled me
to maintain an appearance of imperturbable good-humor, was
1
equally furious." The other incident, which indicates
Shaw's distress when he did not live up to his theory, oc-
curred after a speech on Socialism in Battersea; he told
Henderson:
I remember hearing a workman say to his wife as
I came up behind them on my way to the station:
'When I hear a man of intellect talk like that
for a Whole evening, it makes me feel like a
WORM.’ Which made me feel horribly ashamed of
myself. I felt the shabbiest of imposters, some-
how, though really I gave him the best lecture I
could.
Thus, although Shaw may have found it difficult to
put his theory into practice,3 his analysis of audiences in
general included a recognition by the Speaker of the need of
1
Shaw, "Preface to The Shewingwuppof Blanco Posnet,"
Prefaces. p. 406.
2Henderson, Man of the Century, p. 230.
3He found it difficult not only to put it into practice,
but to evaluate his own practices. Compare Ervine's des-
cription of a Shaw speech, p. 345 of Bernard Shaw: His Life,
Wgrk, and Friendg, with Shaw's remarks about the same in-
cident in Pearson's Postscript, p. 114.
119
human beings for respect as well as a belief that the aud-
ience must be shocked out of complacency.
The ppeakerymgst realize the nature of specific
audienceS.--Although statements referring to the need for
_a speaker to analyze a particular audience are comparatively
few in number, the comments such as those made of the chang-
ing nature of his audiences in the late eighteen-nineties
cited earlier,1 indicate that he was aware of the need to
adapt to specific audiences. Furthermore, the statement,
". . . there was far too much equality and personal intimacy
among the Fabians to allow any member promising to get up
and preach at the rest in the fashion which the working
classes still tolerate submissively from their leaders,"2
reveals that he believed a speaker should adjust his com-
ments to the specific audience situation. Perhaps the most
cogent revelation of the need for audience analysis and sub-
sequent adaptation, however, is Shaw's description of a
speech of his at St. James Hall, London, in favor of women's
suffrage:
Just before I spoke a hostile contingent
entered the room, and I saw that we were out-
numbered, and that an amendment would be car-
ried against us. They were all Socialists of
the anti-Fabian persuasion, led by a man whom
1
See pp. 53—54.
2Shaw, Essays in Fabian Socialism, p. 127.
120
I knew very well, and who was at that time
excitable almost to frenzy, worn out with
public agitation and private worries. It
occurred to me that if, instead of carrying
an amendment, they could be goaded to break
up the meeting and disgrace themselves, the
honours would remain with us. I made a speech
that would have made a bishOp swear and a
sheep fight. The leader, stung beyond en-
durance, dashed madly to the platform to
answer me. His followers, thinking he was
leading a charge, instantly stormed the
platform; broke up the meeting; and recon-
stituted it with their leader as chairman.
I then demanded a hearing, which was duly
granted me as a matter of fair play; and I
had another innings with great satisfaction
to myself.1
On the other hand, if we turn to the reactions of
those who heard him speak to find illustrations Of his
practice of this theory of audience analysis and adapta-
tion, we again find discrepancies. Joad, for example,
whose comments concerning Shaw's speaking ability are, in
the main, quite complimentary, reports: ". . . any one of
. . . [his arguments] might have been addressed to anybody.
'State, state, state' was his motto, no matter to whom you
are making the statement and irrespective of his attitude
to yourself."2 On the other hand, Chesterton--who took
issue with Shaw on a number of countS--stated:
As a rule his speeches are full, not only of sub—
stance, but of substances, materials like pork,
1Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, pp. 100-101.
2
Joad, p. 88.
121
mahogony, lead, and leather. There is no man whose
arguments cover a more Napoleonic map of detail.
It is true that he jokes; but wherever he is he has
topical jokes, one might almost say family jokes.
If he talks to tailors he can allude to the last
absurdity about buttons. If he talks to soldiers
he can see the exquisite and exact humour of the
last gun-carriage.
Thus, although statements indicating the importance
of adapting to specific audiences are not so numerous as
those dealing with the general nature of audiences, the need
for a Speaker's awareness of the characteristics of a particu-
lar audience appear to be a part of Shavian theory relative
to speech content.
The Speaker must not misinterpret audience reac-
Eigg§.-2Although it appears unlikely that Shaw meant for this
precept to have direct bearing on the content of any Specific
Speech, some evidence exists that Shaw believed it valuable
for a speaker to realize that he should not misinterpret the
adulation of the listeners. His first "letter to the editor"
giving reactions to a Moody-Stankey revival meeting voiced
that belief.2 Further, his comment, "Crowded meetings butter
no turnips,"3.echoes the same thought of a speaker's need to
be careful in coming to conclusions of his effectiveness on
lChesterton, p. 125.
2
See pp. 20-21.
3See p. 96.
122
the basis of such observable phenomena. In addition, he
wrote the following about Gladstone:
The chief difficulty in dealing with Mr.
Gladstone as a statesman arises from the fact
that his statesmanship, such as it is, has
nothing to do with his popularity. . . . It
is as an artist, an unrivalled platform artist,
that Mr. Gladstone is popular. Jefferson's
Rip Van Winkle never attained the vogue of
Gladstone's Grand Old Man. Every touch of it
delights the public. . . . And Mr. Gladstone,
too, is so pOpular as an artist that it is
unpOpular to deny that he is a great political
thinker. . . . Who dare allude to his speech
to his tenants in praise of the eternal fitness
of our land system of country gentleman, tenant
farmer, and agricultural labourer; or to the
paper on the Labour question which he contrib-
uted to Lloyd's newspaper; or to his unspeak—
able views on the wickedness of divorce? The
comprehensive infatuation of these utterances
could not be exaggerated by the extremest
malice of faction; but nobody dares say so
because the gallery admires Mr. Gladstone,
and the stalls feel that his peculiar type of
Retrogressivism (it would be flattery to call
it Conservatism) is a strong entrenchment for
their privileges. . . . But when there is noth-
ing dramatic in hand, nobody marks Mr. Gladstone
except in taking account of his power to prevent
Liberalism from avoiding the disastrous colli-
sion with Labour which is daily becoming more
imminent. At the last election his Midlothian
Speeches counted for exactly nothing; and the
serious reverse which he experienced at the 7-
polls excited no sympathy, though the compara-
tively trivial episodes of the gingerbread nut
and the cow brought down the house at once.
To repeat, although Shaw does not state that this
facet of audience analysis need affect the content of a
[Bernard Shaw, "A Symposium: ‘What Mr. Gladstone
Ought To DO, IV," Fortnightly Review, LIII(February, 1893),
276-77.
123
particular speech, his observations of possible misinterpre-
tations of the meaning of audience interest indicate his
desire for the speaker to remember it in the over-all plan
of persuasion.
In summarizing Shaw's theories of audience analysis
as a factor in determining and evaluating content, then, we
find him to hold that a speaker must realize the nature of
audiences in general, that a speaker should realize the
nature of specific audiences, and that a speaker should not
misinterpret audience reactions.
Statement of contentions and attention factors
Shaw's theories on contentions are closely related
to his theories on the nature of the audience: if audiences
tend to be lethargic, then maximizing in stating assertions1
is a natural consequent. Moreover, he believed that maxi-
mizing could be coupled with a style incorporating humor as
a distinguishing feature. Thus humor became a technique
for the effective stating of serious--even controversial--
assertions, a technique which Shaw believed served two im-
portant functions: that of gaining attention and that of
increasing audience receptivity to his ideas.
While the need for gaining the attention of the
audience is implicit in comments by Shaw already recorded
1
See also pages 92-93.
124
in this study, one further piece of evidence might be help-
ful. Although basing the review which follows on a debate
which appeared in book form, he recognized that the argu-
ments were originally presented orally, and his criticism
does not ignore this factor:
For three hours these two gentlemen debate the
question of Home Rule with a self-control, a
strict keeping to the point, and an undulled
sense Of literary form that are beyond all
praise. Weaker men would have sacrificed
propriety to dramatic opportunity, but not
these. James does not sneer nor Andrew
swear. There are none of those gusts of
wrath in which the raised voice and scornful
accent arrest the passer—by with a promise of
a fight. The result is that James and Andrew
personally impress the reader as a pair of
well-conducted and well—informed members of
the middle class, whose arguments will serve
at secondhand in private wranglings over the
question of the hour. Indeed, with Andrew's
speeches at his tongue's end, a man might
become a finished Gladstonian. But he might
also become a finished bore. For the truth
is, Andrew, though conclusive, is not con-
vincing. One feels that James, the nether
millstone of the debate, might make short work
of him by quoting Hegel's dictum that all mis-
takes are made for good reasons.
The theory that attention factors should permeate
the entire speech is evident in the following statement:
". . . you cannot listen to a lesson or sermon unless the
teacher or preacher is an artist. . . . To read a dull book;
to listen to a tedious play or prosy sermon or lecture; to
stare at uninteresting pictures or ugly buildings: nothing,
1
Shaw, The Matter with Ireland, pp. 20-21.
125
Short of disease, is more dreadful than this."1
Furthermore, the humor which was often a part of his
maximizing also served another purpose: that of making the
audience receptive. Shaw, who summarized one of his speeches
for publication, prefaced the summary with the comment: "A
good deal of what I said need not be reported. It served
its purpose of keeping the audience in good humor for the
moment; and there is no reason Why it should survive."2 In
other words, Shaw believed that in the speech itself it is
important to devote a portion of it to the specific purpose
Of making the audience receptive to him as a speaker.
Although not discounting the need of all speakers
to use exaggeration and humor to build audience receptivity,
Shaw indicated that the technique was particularly important
to one whose speech content might irritate an audience.
". . . Clemens was in very much the same position as myself.
He had to put matters in such a way as to make people, who
would otherwise hang him, believe he was joking."3 This
theory was described in greater detail in the following
description of his own experience as a speaker and writer:
Shaw, "Preface to Misalliance," Prefaces, p. 94.
2Bernard Shaw, How to Become a Mggical Critic, ed.
with an intro. by Dan H. Laurence (New York: Hill and Wang,
1961) l p. 276.
3Archibald Henderson, Table-Talk Of G. B. S. (New
York and London: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1925), p.73.
126
Waggery as a medium is invaluable. My case is
really the case of Rabelais over again. When I
first began to promulgate my Opinions, I found
that they appeared extravagant and even insane.
In order to get a hearing, it was necessary for
me to attain the footing of a privileged lunatic,
with the license of a jester. Fortunately the
matter was very easy. I found that I had only
to say with perfect simplicity what I seriously
meant just as it struck me, to make everybody
laugh. My method is to take the utmost trouble
to find the right thing to say, and then say it
with the utmost levity. And all the time the
real joke is that I am in earnest.1
The style which a speaker uses to express his point
Of View, however, should not be separated from what is said.
Whether the speaker uses humor or some other technique which
serves to gain attention and ensure receptivity, the method
should be an integral part of the content, neither super-
imposed nor technique for the sake of amusement alone. He
points out:
I know there are men who, having nothing to say
and nothing to write, are nevertheless so in love
with oratory and with literature that they delight
in repeating as much as they can understand of
what others have said or written aforetime. I
know that the leisurely tricks which their want
of conviction leaves them free to play with the
diluted and misapprehended message supply them
with a pleasant parlor game which they call style.
I can pity their dotage and even sympathize with
their fancy. But a true original style is never
achieved for its own sake: a man may pay from a
shilling to a guinea according to his means, to
see, hear, or read another man's act Of genius;
but he will not pay with his whole life and soul
lClarence Rook, "George Bernard Shaw," The Chap-
Book, November 1, 1896, p. 539, cited in Henderson, Man of
the Century, p. 196.
127
to become a mere virtuoso in literature, ex-
hibiting an accomplishment which will not even
make money for him, like fiddle playing. Ef-
fectiveness of assertion is the alpha and omega
of style. He who has nothing to assert has no
style and can have none: he who has something
to assert will go as far in power of style as
its momentousness and his conviction will carry
him.1
Since many persons have adversely criticized Shaw
for his maximizing and inappr0priate use of humor, one state-
ment made by him is particularly interesting. "Confront me
with a respectable audience, and my sense of humour gets
the better of me: the truths they ignore assume flippant
and fantastic disguises in spite of me: the deportment of
the truthteller sinks to the occasion and I become ego-
2
tistical and shameless." Thus, though Shaw was explicit
in stating his theories of maximizing, attention, and humor
pointed out the care with which a speaker should put the
theories into practice, he appeared to recognize that he
found it difficult to practice his theories.
Qevelgping an argument
. Shaw's theories dealing with the develOpment of an
argument will be presented in three phases: (1) the speaker
Should know the steps in reasoning by which his conclusions
are reached and should make these clear to his audience;
lShaw,"Preface to Man and Supermap," Prefaces, p.165.
2From The New Review, January, 1891, quoted in Ratt-
ray, p. 81.
128
(2) the speaker should have an ample fund of factual material
to support his contentions; and (3) the speaker should use
illustrations, especially those which come from personal ex-
perience, to amplify his assertions.
The speaker should know the steps in reasoning by
which his conclusions are reached and should make these clear
to his apdience. -- In a description of William Morris as a
speaker, Shaw refers to his own "working his way through a
subject" in order to debate upon it.1 Although references
such as this are few, his statements Of the uses of reason-
ing indicate the assumption of understanding the processes
as fundamental. For example, he was displeased with a
Bradlaugh-Hyndman debate in Which neither stuck to the sub-
ject;2 this indicates a belief that the speaker Should know
clearly the chain of reasoning implicit in his subject and
that a failure to do this might result in straying from the
subject. At another point, his comment regarding creativity
which must have the reasoning process as a foundation3 indi-
cates that knowing the steps in reasoning is an underlying
essential: "As I used to put it prosaically, reason can
Letter to Henderson, quoted in Henderson, Man of
the Century, p. 181.
2Shaw, §ixteen Self Sketches, p. 88.
3Further discussion of Shaw's creativity and use of
the unexpected argument and how it reflected his over-all
philoSOphy can be found in Joad, pp. 77 ff. and in chapters
one and two of Bentley.
129
discover for you the best way-—bus or train, underground or
taxi--to get from Piccadilly Circus to Putney, but cannot
explain why you Should want to go to Putney instead of stay-
ing in Piccadilly."l
Furthermore, he believed that the speaker is respon-
sible for making the steps in reasoning clear to an audience.
He praised Henry George as a speaker, for example, because
among other things his views were explained with clarity.
Similarly, he believed that a weakness in Sydney Olivier as
a speaker was that, "Often the ellipses in his reasoning
(like the one in his Fabian Essay) made him hard to follow."3
At the same time, however, Shaw recognized not only
that there is a difference between oral style and written
1
~Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 122.
2Letter to Hamlin Garland, cited in Henderson, Man
of the antupy, p. 215.
Bernard Shaw, "Some Impressions," Sydney Olivier,
Lppters and Selected Writings, ed. with a memoir by Margaret
Olivier (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1948), p. 19.
Although Shaw did not give an example from an Olivier speech
of BUChwEUipSiS, his description on p. 10 of his experience
as editor of the Fabian Essayp with Olivier's reasoning,
referred to in the quotation, sheds light on Shaw's theory:
"On reading his manuscript I found a hiatus in his argu-
ment which convinced me at first that a couple of pages
must have drOpped out. . . . (I filled in the gap in the
argument and asked Olivier to rewrite it in his own stylei
He said that my chain of reasoning was all right; but I
could not persuade him that it was not too Obvious to need
mentioning, nor to take the trouble to translate my version
into his own language."
130
style which might make a difference in what a Speaker might
have to include, but also that it was impossible for him to
theorize exactly how clarity and intelligibility are, in
fact, accomplished:
There is a literary language which is per-
fectly intelligible to the eye, yet utterly
unintelligible to the ear even when it is
easily speakable by the mouth. . . .
I cannot give any rule for securing audible
intelligibility. It is not missed through long
words or literary mannerisms or artificiality
of style, nor secured by simplicity.l
In all, there seems little doubt that Shaw believed
that a speaker should know the steps in reasoning by which
his conclusions are drawn and that these steps should be
made clear to the audience.
The ppeaker should have an ample fund of factual
matppial to support his contentionS.--A1though this theory
has already been described in part in connection with Shaw's
theories of preparation,2 further investigation of this
aspect of speech content is in order since some inconsis-
tencies in Shaw's viewPoint seem to exist. For example, in
a critique of William H. Mallock, Shaw wrote that he should
. . . lecture from his imagination at first hand, as I do,
and save himself all the drudgery of looking up authorities."3
1Shaw, Shaw on Theatre, p. 165.
2See pp. 105—108.
3Bernard Shaw, "On Mr. Mallock's PrOposed Trumpet
Performance ( a Rejoinder)," Fortnightly Review, LV (April
1, 1894), 488.
131
On the other hand, earlier in the same article he admits to
having a fund Of information at hand to support his point of
view: "I cannot say what things were already stored there
[in my mind] to help me--scraps of old books, from Piers
Plowman to Hakluyt's voyages. . ."1 This last quoted state-
ment, in addition to those which follow, appears to indicate
that although he relied heavily on his memory for informa-
tion2 rather than on research for a particular speech, he
regarded specific information as important to a speaker.
This respect for a Speaker's fund of information is
revealed in comments made about Sidney Webb. Shaw spoke
often of his admiration of Webb. particularly for the fund
of facts and figures Webb constantly had at hand. His
description of the first time he heard Webb Speak, ap-
parently when refuting a lecturer, shows his high regard
for Webb's approach:
He knew all about the subject of debate; knew more
than the lecturer; knew more than anybody present;
1Shaw, Fortnightly Review, LV, 487.
2Pearson. A Postscript, pp. 120-21, points out a
Shavian technique for obtaining information: "Next to his
love of clowning and his sense of caution perhaps his most
noticeable feature was an almost limitless curiosity. He
collected information about everything, as another man
collects stamps or coins or first editions. Whenever he
met someone who knew all about machinery or voice produc-
tion or advertising or stained glass or medicine or indeed
anything, he pumped that expert dry and stored up whatever
knowledge gained by this means might be useful to him in
the future."
132
had read everything that had ever been written;
and remembered all the facts that bore on the
subject. He used notes, read them, ticked
them Off one by one, threw them away, and fin-
ished with a coolness and clearness that seemed
to me miraculous.l
This theory of the importance of factual information
is further exemplified by the description of the weaknesses
of Fabian speakers when they first began their activity:
The mischief [of using stock generalizations for
speeches] was, not that our generalizations were
unsound, but that we had no detailed knowledge
of the content of them: we had borrowed them
readymade as articles of faith; and when Oppon-
ents like Charles Bradlaugh asked us for details
we sneered at the demand without being in the
least able to comply with it. . . . All this is
true to this day of the raw recruits of the
movement, and of some Older hands who may be
absolved on the ground of invincible ignorance;
but it is no longer true of the leaders of the
movement in general.
A final example can be found in the review of a lecture
given by Henry Irving in which Shaw pointed out, ". . .
he should be careful to speak from his knowledge and not
from his imagination."3
Very closely related to Shaw's theory of the impor-
tance of information is his view regarding the use of gen-
eralized terms. Although he uses the word "ideals" to
describe a speaker's use of general connotative words rather
lShaw, §ixteen Self Sketches, p. 107.
2Shaw, Essays in Fabian Socialism, p. 143.
3Shaw, Our Theatre in the Nineties I, 33.
133
than Specific terms which can give meaning to an argument,
the position he takes indicates his belief that a speaker
should do more than generalize. In his comments as chair-
man Of a debate between Lady Rhondda and G. K. Chesterton,
he points out the error of both speakers in doing just that:
I notice also in the course of the debate he
[Chesterton] dropped into the habit . . . of deal-
ing with ideals. He used the expression "the
home." Whose home?
But you know there are other ideals besides
the home which you have to be a little careful of.
You Speak of women in the words "the mother" or
"the wife." You had much better talk of Mrs Smith
or Mrs Jones or Sally Robinson or something of
that kind, because at any rate Mrs Jones and Mrs
Smith are human beings, whereas "the wife" or
"the mother" means nothing at all.
Although Shaw did not state to what extent a speaker
should cite the sources of his information, nor were many
references to this concept found, a comment on a need for
citation in a review of a lecture by Edmund Russell shows
awareness of this procedure. After describing some of the
statements made by Russell, he went on to say, "No doubt
Mr. Russell thinks these tales true; but he was wrong to
repeat them without giving sufficient dates, authorities, and
circumstances to convince Skeptics that truth is sometimes
stranger than fiction."2 The belief, then, though seldom
1Shaw, Platform and Pulpit, pp. 168-70.
2Bernard Shaw, "Art Corner," Our Corner, VIII
(September 1, 1886), p. 182.
134
mentioned, concerns the necessity of citing sources when-
ever needed to achieve audience acceptance of material.
Just as Shaw does not state the extent of citation
needed, he does not theorize about how much factual infor-
mation should be made a part of the speech. The Shavian
technique of asserting and saving evidence until directly
questioned which was described by Chesterton and quoted
earlier in this paper, indicates that Shaw operated under
some theory of limitation of the amount of factual material
to be incorporated into the body of the speech. This pos-
sibility is underscored by his statement which follows a
description of the huge audiences enjoyed by Socialist
speakers and indicates the need for emotional appeals
as well as for information: "Their speeches are crammed
with facts and figures and irresistible appeals to the
daily experience and money troubles of the unfortunate
ratepayers and rentpayers who are too harassed by money
worries to care about official party politics."2
On the other hand, concluding that Shaw believed
3
that you should never give information in a lecture appears
1
See p. 107.
2 .
Shaw, Essays in Fabian Socialism, p. 293.
3 .
See Nichols, p. 120. The source of this statement
attributed to Shaw is not given.
135
erroneous in light of statements made by Shaw already cited.
Shaw, then, regarded factual information in a speech
as highly important, recognized that citation is necessary
at times, and yet felt that facts and figures alone are not
sufficient for persuasiveness.
The speaker should use illustrations, especially
thgge which come from personal experience, to amplify his
assertions.--This theory is a natural consequent to Shaw's
statements about attention factors and the quotation cited
immediately above. That he held this precept and followed
it in practice is illustrated by Winsten's remark: "I
have heard him lecture, long ago, in my own youth, to
learned audiences: a very serious analysis of our social
system; but the part which moved bald head and blue stock-
ing was his account of his experiences as a child. . ."l
The letter to Janet Achurch with Shaw describing
which of her personal experiences as an actress to incor—
porate into her speech, and which follows his advice of
selecting subjects making possible the speaking from ex-
perience, affords evidence of the belief that illustrations
should be used for amplification:
lStephen Winsten in Bernard Shaw, The Quintessence
of G. B. S. selected and with an introduction by Stephen
m
Winsten (New York: Creative Age Press, 1949), p. vii.
136
Now here I (G. B. S.) must leave you (Janet)
to make the real stuff of your speech for your-
self. The idea is to quote the sham womanly
stuff from The Lady of Lyons, Adrienne, and so
on, and contrast it with passages from Ibsen's
plays. A comic performance of the death scene
from Adrienne would be good. . . . Then give
them the sharp, businesslike death scene at the
end of Hedda Gabler. . . . Allude to Dicken's
Edith Summerson and Agnes Wickfield. . .
Shaw was even more emphatic on this point of uSe of
personal experiences in a criticism of a lecture given by
Henry Irving: "I do deliberately want to make it impos-
sible for Mr Irving, or any other member of his profession,
ever hereafter to get on the Royal Institution or any other
platform, and, with stores of first-hand experience to draw
on for a sincere and authoritative, and consequently enor-
mously interesting and valuable lecture on his art, to put
us off with two columns of stereo. . ."2
In summary, then, Shaw held that a speaker, in order
to develop an argument, should know and make clear his rea-
soning process, should have ample factual material to sup-
port his contentions when necessary, and should make use of
illustrative material for amplification.
Refutation
The final phase of speech content considered by Shaw
lShaw, Shaw on Theatre, p. 56.
2Shaw, Our Theatre in the Nineties, I, 35.
137
in his critiques, advice, and reports of his own speaking
experiences was that Of refutation. Shaw was famous for
his repartee; and remarks which indicate the importance he
put upon refutation appear throughout this chapter and the
previous one and will not be reiterated here. His comments
about the nature of this phase of Speaking, however, should
be noted.
Although the major adverse criticism leveled at
Shaw in this regard was his tendency to avoid direct answers
to questions,1 he never stated any theory of refutation ad-
vocating equivocation. He did report one incident, however,
which indicates no objection to the principle of stock
answers. He wrote that a professional speaker "was hired
at‘fs3 a week to follow me to all my meetings and confute me
by the Duke of Argyll's Liberty & Property Defence League.
He always made the same speech and I always made the same
smashing reply."
1
Two examples of many available illustrate this
point. Once after a speech a lady asked Shaw whether he
believed in the Immaculate Conception; Ervine, p. 96, des-
cribed the situation which followed: "The words scarcely
left her lips than she received this answer. 'Yes, I
believe that all conceptions are immaculate!‘ which was
neither a reply to her enquiry nor in accordance with his
own plea for better births and the production of a finer
race than we possess." Another incident, reported by
Pearson, A Postscript, p. 42, was in reply to the ques-
tion, "Do you approve of violence in politics: "The poli-
ticians have never waited for my approval."
2Shaw, Sixteen Self Sketches, p. 100.
138
His most specific statement regarding refutation was
that a special approach and point of View are needed for
effectiveness with this aspect of speaking. He makes this
comment in the process of describing William Morris as a
speaker:
I must add, however, that though Morris was
rich in the anormous patience of the greatest
artists, he went unprovided with the small change
of that virtue which enables cooler men to suffer
fools gladly. The provocations and interruptions
of debate, which give experts such effective 0p-
portunities for retort that they are courted
rather than resented, infuriated Morris, espe-
cially when they were trivial and offensive (he
could bear with any serious and honest utterance
like an angel); so that at last the comrades,
When there was a debating job to be done, put it
on me, knowing that I could play cat and mouse
with any ordinary Opponent whilst Morris, in the
background, could only devastate his moustache
and supply a growled basso contimo of 'Damfool!
Damfool!‘
Just as in the summary of Shaw's theories of prepara-
tion, we find that his ideas on speech content do not vary
markedly from those noted in present-day texts on speech
making. He saw the need for audience analysis, advocated
maintaining audience attention and good-will and stating
arguments with clarity, pointed to the importance of evi-
dence and illustration in develOping arguments, and recog-
nized the special demands of the refutation situation.
Shaw, "William Morris As I Knew Him," William
Morris: Artist, Writer, Socialist, II, xxxix.
139
Delivery
Although evaluation of Shaw as a practitioner of
speaking is not the function of this chapter, a description
of Shaw's delivery by one of his contemporaries serves as
an interesting background for Shaw's theories of delivery:
The first fact that one realises about Shaw
. . . is his voice. Primarily it is the voice
of an Irishman, and then something of the voice
of a musician. It possibly explains much of his
career; a man may be permitted to say so many
impudent things with so pleasant an intonation.
But the voice is not only Irish and agreeable,
it is also frank and as it were inviting con-
ference. This goes with a style and gesture
which can only be described as at once very
casual and very emphatic. He assumes that
bodily supremacy which goes with oratory, but
he assumes it with almost ostentatious careless-
ness; he throws back the head, but looSely and
laughingly. He is at once swaggering and yet
shrugging his shoulders, as if to drop from them
the mantle of the orator which he has confidently
assumed. Lastly, no man ever used voice or ges-
ture better for the purpose of expressing cer-
tainty; no man can say "I tell Mr. Jones he is
totally wrong" with more air of unforced and
even casual conviction.l
There is little wonder that a man who could elicit
such comments about his delivery-—and the one cited above is
but one of many which convey the same impression-~would have
something to say about what constitutes effective delivery.
Some of these comments have already been recorded in that
. . 2 . .
portion of this chapter dealing With preparation. Additional
1Chesterton, pp. 67-68.
2
See pp. 108-111.
140
statements concerning delivery will be described via the
categories of (1) the extemporaneous method, (2) bodily
action, and (3) voice and articulation.
The extemporaneous method
Although theories dealing with extemporaneous
speaking are being discussed in this section entitled
"delivery," it should be kept in mind that the term
"extemporaneous" refers to more than simply a kind of
delivery: it encompasses a procedure of preparation and
decisions regarding content as well. Therefore, although
these theories are given a prominent place as a method of
delivery, the reader should keep in mind the usual bearing
these comments which follow would have on other phases of
the speech-making process.
Shaw's personal preferences for extemporaneous
delivery have been amply noted. Furthermore, espousal of
extemporaneous delivery has a direct relationship to his
theories of audience adaptation. That it also is related
to a speaker's ability to interest an audience was indi—
cated in a review of the lecture of a Mrs. Russell.l More-
over, the strength of Shaw's belief in the theory that
extemporaneous speaking is the ideal method for a public
speaker can be gleaned from these remarks made to Janet
1Shaw, Our Corner, VIII, 183.
141
Achurch:
To begin with, don't write your speech. If you
attempt to read a lecture on Ibsen, you will em-
barrass yourself and bore your audience to dis-
traction. If you haven't sufficient courage and
simplicity of character to chatter away pleasantly
to an audience from a few notes and your own ex-
perience, then let the platform alone.
Thus, he seemed to believe that if a speaker could not, or
would not, attempt extemporaneous speaking, he should not
call himself a speaker.
.Bodily action
Although Shaw seldom wrote of bodily action except
when he was disturbed by speakers who, he felt, violated
basic principles, the few statements he made indicate he
was cognizant of the basic techniques. For example, a letter
to Florence Farr on April 27, 1893, contains a reference to
the need for prOper posture on the platform and off it.
Shaw's sharpest remarks on prOper posture, however, were
addressed to H. G. Wells:
I have yet another technical lesson to give
you. When you first Spoke at a Fabian meeting,
I told you to hold up your head and speak to the
bracketed bust of Selwyn Image on the back wall.
To shew that you were not going to be taught by
me, you made the commonest blunder of the tyro:
you insisted on having a table; leaning over it
on your knuckles; and addressing the contents of
lShaw, Shaw on Theatre, p. 53.
2Bernard Shaw, Florence Farr, Bernard Shaw, W. B.
xeatsi Letters, ed. Clifford Bax (London: Home & Van Thal
Ltd., 1946): p. 9.
142
your contracted chest to the tablecloth. I will
now, having tried to cure you of that by fair
means in vain, cure you of it by a blow beneath
the belt: Where did you get that-attitude? IN
THE SHOP. At the New Reform Club, when your
knuckles touched the cloth, you said unconsciously,
by reflex action, "Anything else to-day, madam?"
and later on, "What's the next article?" fortun-
ately you were inaudible, thanks to the attitude.
Now I swear that the next time you take that
attitude in my presence I will ask you for a
farthing paper of pins. I will make a decent
public man of you yet, and an effective public
speaker, if I have to break your heart in the
process.
A published critique of a lecture on Delsarte by
Mr. and Mrs. Edmund Russell contains details which not only
give evidence of what he considered prOper posture but also
deal with bodily movement on the platform. First, of Mrs.
Russell he says:
Her normal attitude, instead of being one of
equilibrium, was not even upright. She con-
stantly swayed and stOOped, sometimes with a
lateral movement which was distressing and un-
meaning; and she held her arms downwards, with
the forearms turned outward at an ungraceful
oblique angle which was exactly equal at both
sides (a curiously elementary blunder). Fur-
ther, she was draped and made up to so little
advantage that I hardly recognized the remark-
ably interesting and attractive young lady who
had been pointed out to me in private as Mr.
Russell's wife.
He adds comments about the use of gesture, also:
My impression of the lecture was that its
delivery would not have satisfied del Sarte
1
l9. 2
Shaw, Our Corner, VIII, 182.
Letter to H. G. Wells, quoted in Ervine, pp. 418-
143
except at a few points. . . Mr. Russell's delivery
lacks spontaneity. He is preoccupied with this
method; betrays that he is repeating by rote a
prepared address; and adOptshas his normal facial
expression a sort of tragic mask which may have
been appropriate enough to del Sarte in the act
of declaiming a recitative by Gluck, but Which
was extremely ill-chosen by a strange lecturer
with a suspicious audience to win over. A still
greater error, and one into which Mrs. Russell
subsequently plunged, was that of acting the
lecture as if it were a dramatic monologue, and
even accompanying it with imitative gestures.
Imagine a temperance lecturer quaffing imaginary
goblets and reeling about the platform; or a
Socialist orator influencing the moral of the
factory acts by imitating the motion of a power
loom! How the people would laugh: How del
-Sarte's ghost, if present and capable of utter-
ance, would unravel the confusion between repre-
sentation and persuasion, concentration and
irrelevance, which had led the speaker astray.l
Above all, Shaw stressed naturalness in delivery.
He disliked "staginess" on the platform and said ". . .
acting is the one thing that is intolerable in a lecturer."
As we attempt to summarize these remarks, we dis-
cover that Shaw's theory of bodily action incorporates the
following injunctions to the speaker: assume an upright
posture which has been made natural to you by constant use
of it; keep movement on the platform meaningful; and avoid
distracting imitative gestures: keep in mind that you are
not acting.
1Shaw, Our Corner, VIII, 182.
2Shaw, Our Theatre in the Nineties, II, 35. He dis-
likes the excesses of acting on the stage, also the sentence
which follows the one just quoted reads: "Even on the stage
it is a habit that only the finest actors get rid of com-
pletely."
144
Voice andarticulation
As we consider all that Shaw has to say about the
technical aspects of speaking, the greatest proportion of
his comments are concerned with the prOper use of the voice,
even though only a few of his remarks are given here. His
concern for adequate volume, for proper voice training, and
for developing listening habits which would enable a speaker
to use his voice to its maximum effectiveness has already
been presented. A few additional comments relating to
theory, however, seem in order.
First, as indicated in a letter to Florence Farr,
care should be given to the articulation of consonants.
Then, though the sounds should be carefully produced, they
should appear natural; and provincialisms should be avoided:
First, there was Mr. Russell's excellent enunciation,
unforced and perfectly clear. A few obscure vowels
were suppressed, as in galry for gallery; a final r
introduced, as in arenar for arena; and an occasional
Americanism-- jahschoor for gesture, for example--
let slip. . . . Mrs. Russell . . . neither speaks
nor stands so del Sarteanly as her husband; but she,
too, makes herself audible without the least effort.
At the same time, Shaw admitted that standards for
the stage, the platform, and the street are not identical:
"I am myself despoaaito insist on the right of the individual
to the widest latitude; but obviously a line must be drawn
lShaw, Florence Farr, Bernard Shaw, W. B. Yeats;
Letters, p. 16.
2Shaw, Our Corner, VIII, 182-83.
145
someWhere; and it Should be drawn higher for one who pro-
fesses speaking as an art than for a private person or a
prOpagandist lecturer."l Furthermore, in another instance
he concentrated on distinguishing between the care needed
on the platform as compared with that necessary in conversa-
tion.2 To Shaw, however, this admission of varying stand-
ards does not seem to excuse the speaker from taking care
to improve his use of the voice.
Pronunciation, closely allied with articulation and
sometimes difficult to separate from it, also received
Shaw's attention.3 Here again he realized that an indi-
vidual should not make a fetish of "prOper" pronunciation:
"I hold that the man who regards an intelligibly spelt or
prettily uttered word as 'wrong' because it does not con-
4 Yet he be-
form to the dictionary is a congenital fool."
lieved that standards are necessary; when a reader took him
to task for a review in which failure to maintain standards had
lShaw, London Music in 1888-89, p. 381.
2Bernard Shaw, "Spoken English and Broken English,“
Onjganguage, ed. with intro. and notes by Abraham Tauber;
foreword by James Pitman (New York: Philos0phical Library,
1963). Pp. 60-62.
His interest in prOper pronunciation is also
revealed in his membership--later chairmanship--on the
B. B. C. Committee on the Pronunciation of Doubtful Words.
4Shaw, Our Theatre in the Nineties, II, 38.
146
been decried, Shaw replied by asking the letter writer which
he would prefer, ". . . the adOption of average colloquial
pronunciation by Mr. Irving, or the adoption of Mr. Irving's
1
pronunciation by the average man?" Though Shaw's remark
is in the form of a question, his position on the matter
seems quite clear.
Although making many comments on the technical aspect
of voice and articulation, Shaw insisted that meaning not be
neglected by paying undue attention to sound. In a letter
to Florence Farr, for example, he warned her to give atten-
tion to meaning.2 Furthermore, the following criticism of
political speakers he had heard on the radio implies that
some of the speakers neglected to pay sufficient attention
to meaning:
Most of the politicians are awful. . . . Some—
one ought to tell them that their House of Com-
mons style, with long pauses between every word
to think out what they are going to say next,
is pitiful through the mike, especially when
they pronounce their prepositions and conjunc-
tions as if they were speaking oracles.
In conclusion, then, although Shaw began his speaking
at a time when the "elocutionary manner" was rampant, his
theories on delivery, with emphasis on controlled natural-
ness, are strikingly like the ones which are dominant today.
1Shaw, London Music in 1888-89, p. 270.
2Shaw, Florence Farr, Bernard Shaw, W. B. Yeats;
Letters, p. 16.
3Pearson, A Postscript, p. 83.
147
Summary
The theories of public Speaking which have been pre-
sented here have been derived from Shaw's own statements,
from statements which came from critiques of speeches of
others, from advice given to others on public Speaking, and
from comments he made regarding his own Speaking experiences.
Although a few evaluations by contemporaries of Shaw have
been incorporated into the chapter for purposes of illustra-
tion, the emphasis has been upon actual statements attri-
buted to Shaw.
Even though Shaw's theories of the art of public
speaking are scattered through a wide range of materials,
they represent an unusual degree of thoroughness in dealing
with the various facets of speech theory. He expressed him-
self on the nature and function of the art of public speak-
ing, on preparation, on Speech content, and on delivery.
Furthermore, although he nowhere states indebted-
ness to a study of rhetorical theory, Shaw's remarks on
public speaking demonstrate an understanding of principles
which are comparable to those of classical rhetoric. Also,
despite the fact that he did the bulk of his speaking at a
time when elocutionary approaches to public speaking were
in vogue, his theories bear a striking resemblance to present-
day instruction in Speech, both in sc0pe and nature. While
148
his theoretical statements add nothing new to the body of
knowledge about public speaking, it is important to note
that a man whose primary concern with public speaking was
that of a practitioner was cognizant of the theory upon
which platform speaking is based.
CHAPTER III
SHAW'S SPEECHES
Purpose and Nature of Entries
Although studies of Shaw as a public speaker have
been overshadowed by concentration upon Shaw the dramatist,
increasing attention, as previously mentioned, is being
given to his rhetorical activities. Furthermore, as stated
earlier, this study is not intended as a final evaluation
of Shaw's speaking; his speeches merit additional investi-
gation employing a variety of methodologies.
Since such additional studies are possible and
desirable, a list of speeches by Shaw could serve a useful
function. Although excellent Shaw bibliographies exist,
they do not make a distinction between speeches and other
types of Shaw material. This factor, coupled with the for-
midable mass of material by and about him provides justi-
fication for a listing of speeches attributed to G. B. S.
Providing assistance for future Shaw studies is
secondary, however, to a function implicit in the study
of Shaw as a public speaker: even though the listing of
speeches represents only a small fraction of the total
149
150
output, it can provide evidence of the number of appearances
by Shaw before an audience; furthermore, such material can
also reveal the kinds of subjects Shaw selected for his
speeches. These considerations led to the decision to in-
corporate into the body of this paper information about
speeches available rather than making it a part of the
bibliography.
Additional advantages accrue from including such
information in the main portion of the paper rather than
in the bibliography: a chronological listing, which may be
of use in noting tendencies in subject choices, can be used;
multiple sources of the same Speeches can be made readily
apparent; and information not normally included in a bib-
liography can be made a part of the listing.
Although a diversity of material could be made a
part of this chapter, certain kinds of references have been
excluded. First, general references, such as statements in
in Shavian correSpondence mentioning briefly that he had
given a speech the past week, will not be included since
conclusions derived from such information would be limited.
Second, participation in discussions will be excluded; While
such references are frequent-~even where the content of
Shaw's statements might be available-~their value in a study
of Shaw as a public speaker would be minimal without the
151
original speeches prompting Shaw's reply. Third, reports
of interviews will not be included since Shaw's remarks,
though they might be oral, were presented to an audience
through an intermediary.
On the other hand, as complete a description as
possible of the availability of texts will be attempted.
In addition to giving the sources of known texts,l sum-
maries of speeches will be listed, but a distinction between
text or summary will be noted in the listing wherever such
information is known. Texts of papers read, as well as
extemporaneous speeches, will be included; but again the
distinction will be noted in the description wherever such
l
Verbatim reports of Shaw speeches are relatively
limited, and such material will be duly noted. Since Shaw
appeared to submit speech manuscripts for publication after
oral delivery and Since evidence exists that he often re-
vised other types of published material, the label "text"
should not be misconstrued. No attempt will be made to
evaluate the amount of revision between delivery and publi-
cation of speeches even in obvious cases of alterations
such as with "The Quintessence of Ibsenism."
The usual care must be exercised, of course, in
relying upon the accuracy of verbatim reports. In a letter
in answer to a criticism of a point made in a speech, Shaw
pointed out that he had been reported inaccurately. He
absolved the reporter of guilt in a typical Shavian fashion:
"In the matter of newspaper reporting I suffer from two
serious disadvantages. One is that as I am a fairly rapid
speaker, the reporter who does not stretch his powers to
the utmost soon gets left behind. The other is that report-
ers almost invariably pay me the high compliment of finding
me so interesting that they give themselves up recklessly
to the enjoyment of listening to me and throw their duties
to the winds." See Shaw, The Matter with Ireland, p. 59.
152
information is available. Radio addresses will be described
as such, not to indicate the type of delivery (extemporaneous
or manuscript), but to reveal the nature of the audience
addressed.
Since some speech texts can be found in more than
one source, all sources which are known will be reported
in this chapter except where duplication stems from various
editions or collections of "standard" works."1 In instances
meriting the inclusion of various sources, primary position
is given to recent collections2 with other sources given as
they are stated by the collectors even when one of these
sources may have been discovered by this writer before con-
sulting the collection.3
1For example, the Preface to The Apple Cart, which
contains a speech text, appears not only in single editions
of The Apple Cart but also in Shaw's Prefaces and in the
later Complete Prefaces. A Similar situation occurs with
Fabian papers which have been published individually, as
part of Fabian Essays, and in Shaw's collection, Essays in
Fabian Socialism. Since such duplication is familiar to
those making even a cursory study of Shaw's works, nota-
tions of various sources of this type will be omitted from
this study. In such cases the text source ordinarily will
be a volume which is a collection made by Shaw.
The basic reason for this decision is simply that
such material appears to be more readily available to the
reader.
3This should not be construed to mean that every
speech source listed by collectors has been verified.
While such might be a part of a detailed study of specific
Speeches, in this portion of this study such an approach
appears to be an unnecessary duplication of such scholarly
work as that already done, for example, by Dan L. Laurence.
153
Also included in this chapter are references to
speech texts or summaries cited by biographers and critics
but not examined by the writer--that is, texts or summaries
merely reported as existing but not quoted in entirety in
the reference listed. For the most part the citations refer
to material in private collections or in newspapers not
readily available; the inclusions of information indicating
the existence of such material could be of assistance in
future Shavian studies.
Finally, some references to speeches Which give
only the date or a specific audience/occasion description
are also listed although no mention is made of the existence
of either texts or summaries. This material is included
in hOpes that such information may help lead to the location
of additional speech texts.
The Speeches Listed
Since a few sources appear frequently in this list,
the following abbreviations will be used:
MC ‘Archibald Henderson, George Bernard Shaw:
Man of the Century.
NYT New York Times.
PP Bernard Shaw, Platform and Pulpit
1The practice of multiple listing of sources for
this material or of the material described in the paragraph
'which follows will not be followed since they are sources
of information rather than sources of texts.
154
RS Bernard Shaw, The Religious Speeches of Bernard
Shaw
January, 1884 portion of remarks available
Browning Society
discussion of Caliban
MC, p. 143, quotes portion and cites W. G.
Kingsland, Browning Society Abstracts.
February 29, 1884 paper prepared, read by another;
abstract available
New Shakespeare Society
on Troilus and Cressida
MC, p. 153, cites Society's Transactions (1880-1885),
No. 2, for full abstract.
January, 1885 address reported
Dialectical Society
advocating Socialism
Reported in Arthur H. Nethercot, "G. B. S. and Annie
Besant," The Shaw Bulletin, I (September, 1955), p. 4.
January 30, 1885 speech; text may be available
Industrial Remuneration Conference, Prince's Hall,
Piccadilly
Hesketh Pearson, G. B. S.: A Full-Length Portrait,
p. 59, quotes introduction; MC, p. 232, cites
Report of the Industrial Remuneration Conference
(London, 1885), p. 400. Brief portion reprinted
from Fabian News in C. E. M. Joad (ed.), Shaw and
Society (Long Acre, London: Odhams Press Limited,
n. d.). pp. 157-58.
155
February 26, 1885 Speech text available
March
before the Liberal and Social Union at the rooms of
the Society of British Artists, London
"PrOprietors and Slaves"
PP, pp. 1-12. Credited source: The Christian
Socialist, April, 1885; reprinted in Liberty (Boston),
May 23, 1885.
13, 1886 debate against Rev. F. W. Ford
reported
South Place Institute, South Place, Finsburg, E. C.
"That the welfare of the community necessitates the
transfer of the land and existing capital of the
country from private owners to the state."
reported in MC, p. 224. May be an error in date; cf.
March 13, 1887 reference.
October 1, 1886 reading of paper reported
before the Fabian Society
reported in "The Fabian Society and Socialist Notes,"
Our Corner, VIII (November 1, 1886), 316.
November 9, 1886 paper read; text available
Fall,
before Economic Circle
"Interest"
"Concerning Interest," Our Corner, X (September and
October, 1887), 162ff. and 193ff. MC, p. 275, states
that this article is "presumably this paper in
expanded form."
1886 lecture reported
Fabian Society
156
"Socialism and the Family"
Reported in E. R. Pease, The History of the Fabian
Society, p. 69.
December 17, 1886 Speech reported
Fabian Society
"Why we do not act up to our principles"
Reported in "The Fabian Society and Socialist Notes,"
Our Corner, IX (January 1, 1887), 62. (Scheduled
lecturer ill; Shaw substituted.)
March 4, 1887 speech reported
Fabian Society
"Surplus Value"
Reported in "The Fabian Society and Socialist Notes,"
Our Corner, IX (April 1, 1887), 253. (Scheduled
lecturer unable to read promised paper; Shaw
substituted.)
March 13, 1887 Speech reported
South Place institute
with Rev. W. Ford on Individualists and Socialists
Scheduling of Speech reported in "The Fabian Society
and Socialist Notes," Our Corner, IX (March 1, 1887),
189.
October 14, 1887 speech reported
South Place Institute
"to protest against the execution of the seven men
known as 'the Chicago Anarchists'."
Reported in "The Fabian Society and Socialist Notes,"
Our Corner, X (November 1, 1887), 317.
157
November 4, 1887 speech reported
March
Hampstead, Vestry Hall, Haverstock Hill
"Some Illusions that Blind us to Socialism"
Scheduling of speech reported in "The Fabian Society
and Socialist Notes," Our Corner, X (October 1, 1887),
253, and reported in the December 1 issue, page 381.
16, 1888 speech; partial summary of
contents reported available
small group, primarily Fabians
reply to R. B. Haldane, M. P.: "Radical Remedies
for Economic Evils"
MC, pp. 235-36, cites George Standring, The Radical,
II, No. 8 (March 17, 1888).
September 7, 1888 Speech; text available
Economic Section of the British Association at Bath
"The Transition to Social Democracy"
Shaw, Essays in Fabian Socialism, pp. 31-61, and
Our Corner, XII (November 1, 1888), 257-75.
For Shaw's report of this and for related comments
see Pease, The History of the Fabian Society, pp. 273-
83.
October 5, 1888 paper read; text available
Fabian Society
"The Economic Aspect of Socialism"
Our Corner, XII (December 1, 1888), 352-69. Summary
in To-Day, X (November, 1888), 150-52, with notation
that full report appears in Church Reformer.
158
February 5, 1889 paper read; text available
at meeting of the Reverend Stewart D. Headlam's
Church and Stage Guild, London
"Acting, By One Who Does Not Believe In It"
PP, pp. 12-23: "Shaw himself drafted the report of
the meeting (reproduced here) for publication in
The Church Reformer, March, 1889.“
July 18, 1890 paper read; text available
Fabian meeting, St. James Restaurant, London
"The Quintessence of Ibsenism"
Shaw, Major Critical Essays (London: Constable and
Company, Limited, 1932), pp. 1-150.
September 20- lectures reported
October 27, 1890
"Lancashire Campaign"
Described in Pease, The History of the Fabian Society,
pp. 95-97.
January 14 & 15, 1891 debate; verbatim text reported
available
Hall of Science, London, G. Standring and E. R.
Pease presiding
"The Legal Eight Hours Question"
MC, p. 229, cites The Legal Eight Hours Opestion:
A Two Nights' Public_erate between Mr. G. W. Foote
and Mr. George Bernard ShawL_Verbatim Report (Lon-
don, 1891).
Letter from Dan H. Laurence, November 25, 1957, refers
to a three-night debate with same title but dated 1889.
159
October 16, 1891 paper read; text available
Fabian Society
"The Impossibilities of Anarchism"
Shaw, Essays in Fabian Socialism, pp. 63-99.
February 6, 1892 paper read; text available
Conference of the London and Provincial Fabian
Societies at Essex Hall
"The Fabian Society: What it has done and how it
has done it"
Shaw, Essays in Fabian Socialism, pp. 123-60.
1892 Speaking reported
Town Hall of Dover
election Speech
Reported in MC, p. 229
June, 1892 speech reported; very brief
summary available
Vegetarian banquet at the Wheatsheaf, London
on vegetarianism
"A Feast for Faddists? The Pall Mall Gazette,
June 27, 1892.
August 4, 1892 speech content described by Shaw
Hall of Science, St. Luke's Parish
on Shelley
Described in Shaw, "Shaming the Devil About Shelley,"
Pen Portraits and Reviews (rev. ed.; London: Con-
stable and Company Limited, 1932), pp. 236-46.
160
August, 1892 Speech reported by Shaw
Manchester
on Socialism
MC quotes a letter on page 362 from Shaw to Webb in
which Shaw says: "I have preached an open air sermon
& an indoors one--the former in heavy rain--at the
Labor Church, Manchester. . . . On Tuesday about 40
female Clubs in the G. P. 0. [General Post Office]
took a room in the Memorial Hall & got me to lecture
to them on Socialism."
December, 1892 speech reported
April
to the Socialists of Hammersmith
on the controversy over Widowers' Houses
Rattray, Bernard Shaw: A Chronicle, pp. 89-90, cites
The Era of December 24, 1892, for this information.
28, 1893 Speech reported by Shaw
at Bow
Shaw, Florence FarrLlBernard Shaw, W. B. Yeats;
Letters, p. 10.
Summer, 1893 paper read; text available
Fabian Society
"The Importance of Anarchism"
Joad, Shaw and Society, pp. 120-25. Joad reports
that this tract (No. 45 of July, 1893) first
appeared as a paper read to Fabians.
October 13, 1894 extract of speech reported
available
at Westbourne Park
161
"Mr. Bernard Shaw and the Liberal Party"
Letter from Laurence, November 25, 1957. Source
cited: Liberal Magazine, II (November, 1894).
July 12, 1896 lecture; text available
before the Hammersmith Socialist Society at William
Morris's Kelmscott House, Hammersmith
"What Socialism Will be Like"
PP, pp. 23-31. Credited Source: The Labour Leader,
December 19, 1896.
May 22, 1900 speech text available
the Queen's Large Hall, Langham Place, London;
annual meeting of the National Anti-Vivisection
Society
"Queen's Hall Speech"
Bernard Shaw, Are Doctors Really Inhuman? (Michigan
City, Indiana: Fridtjof-Karla Publications, 1957),
pp. 12-180
May 30, 1900 Speech; text available
Annual Meeting of the London Anti-Vivisection Society,
London, the St. Martin's Town Hall.
"The Dynamitards of Science"
PP. pp. 31-36. Credited source: Monthly Record and
Animal's Guardian, June, 1900; reprinted as a pam-
phlet by the Society, 1900.
November 20, 1901 speech reported; very brief
section quoted
before The Article Club, London
described as "first on a Zionist platform"
162
Reported in MC, p. 180.
January, 1902 lecture; summary may be available
Fabian Society at Clifford's Inn
"Drama"
Content report in MC. pp. 692-93; cites The Daily
Chronicle, January 24, 1902.
November, 1902 summary of speech
St. Pancras Council meetings
Portion quoted in H. M. Geduld, "Bernard Shaw,
Vestryman and Borough Councillor," The Shavian, II
(June, 1964), pp. 12-13. Source credited: ‘ggl
Pancras Gazette, November 15, 1902. Brief summaries
from the following issues of the Gazette are also
noted: December 1, 1900; June 10, 1901; December
21, 1901; October 13, 1902; and June 20, 1903. All
entries on page 5.
October 2, 1903 summary of speech; text may be
available
Glasgow Fabian Society, City Hall, Glasgow, Scotland
on free trade
Summary in MC, pp. 267-68; source cited: Shaw, lg
Free Trade Alive or Dead? Printed for Private
Circulation by George Standring (London, 1906).
Letter to John Burns, a c0py of which Shaw sent to
the Webbs, appears in MC, pp. 369-72, and contains
Shaw's description of what he intended to say on
this occasion.
February (?), 1904 may be speech; text reported
available
Election address, St. Pancras
April,
163
Cited in MC, p. 266. Geoffrey H. Wells, A Bibliography
of the Books and Pamphlets of George Bernard Shaw,
Supplement to "The Bookman's Journal," London, 1925,
lists the pamphlet, Election Address (London:
McCorquodale and Co., Ltd., 1904), on p. 13.
1905 speech abstract reported
available
Kensington Town Hall
on Shakespeare: "Bernard Shaw Abashed"
MC, p. 563 and 696, cites London Daily News, April
17, 1905. Letter from Laurence, November 25, 1957,
indicates that this was reprinted in part in Tolstoy
on Shakespeare.
October 24, 1905 address reported; text may be
available
Guildhall School of Music, London
"Shakespeare on the Modern Stage"
Described in MC, pp. 708-709; credited source:
"Shakespeare on the Modern Stage," London Shake-
speare League, Guildhall School of Music, London,
1905. Second edition of pamphlet, 1915, pp. 22-
26, 38-42.
December 13, 1905 notes from an address
to the StudentS' Union at the London School of
Economics and Political Science
"Life, Literature, and Political Economy"
The Shaw Review, VIII (September, 1965), 104-110.
Cited source: The Clare Market Review, I (January,
1906), 27-32.
October, 1906 speech summary; includes
contemporary account of method
164
Onward Buildings
"What is a Fabian Society?"
The Shaw Review, VIII (January, 1965), 25-28. Cited
source: Harry Beswick, "G. B. S.--The Orator," The
Clarion (London), October 26, 1906.
November 22, 1906 speech text available
City Temple
"The Religion of the British Empire"
RS, pp. 1-8. Credited source: The Christian
Commonwealth, November 29, 1906.
November 29, 1906 speech summary available
Guild of St. Matthews at Essex Hall, Rev. S. D.
Headlam presiding
on religion
Summary in The Times (London), November 30, 1906,
p. 10. See reference to this speech in RS, p. 9.
According to The Shavian, No. 13 (September, 1958),
an account of this Speech is in The Regional, No. 4
(May, 1958), the bulletin of the New York Regional
group of the Shaw Society.
December 16, 1906 speech summary available
Fabian Society
reply to H. G. Wells
MC, p. 253, quotes from S. G. Hobson, Pilgrim to
the Left (Edward Arnold Lts., London, 1938), pp.
106-107. Resume also in F. E. Loewenstein, "The
Shaw-Wells Controversy of 1904-1908," Fabian
Quarterly, No. 46 (April, 1944), pp. 15-20. Pease,
The History of the Fabian Society, p. 174, states
that a "toned down" report by Shaw of his remarks
165
appears in Fabian News, January, 1907. Reprints
from Fabian News in Joad, Shaw and Society, pp.
158-165.
May 16, 1907 speech text available
Kensington Town Hall
"The New Theology"
RS, pp. 9-19. Credited source: Christian Common-
wealth, May 23, 30, 1907, and shortened form in
Los Angeles Examiner, July 21, 1907.
July 7, 1907 Speech text available;
transcript
at dinner honoring the managers of the Court
Theatre, Criterion Restaurant, London.
reply to toast by the Earl of Lytton: "The Court
Theatre"
PP, pp. 36-41. Credited source: souvenir brochure
of the proceedings, Complimentary Dinner to J. E.
Vendrenne and Mr. H. Granville Barkeryil907. The
brochure, which describes the contents as a "tran-
script, is reprinted in The Shaw Review, II (May,
1959). pp. 17-34.
October 8, 1908 Speech text available
pulpit of the Reverend R. J. Campbell's City Temple,
London
"Literature and Art"
PP, pp. 41-49. Credited source: The Christian
Commonwealth, October 14, 1908.
November 18, 1908 part of debate reported
available
Surrey Masonic Hall, Camberwell
166
debate on Socialism between Shaw and Chesterton;
Belloc in chair
Letter from Laurence, November 25, 1957. Source
cited: The New Age, March 18, 1909.
February 16, 1909 paper read; text available
1909
1909
Medico-Legal Society, London
"Socialism and Medicine"
PP, pp. 49-74. Credited source: Transactions of
the Medico-Legal Society, 1908-1909.
transcript of testimony
Parliament hearing on censorship
Shaw, in Preface to The Shewing-Up of Blanco Posnet,
p. 400 of Prefaces, refers to the Report from the
Joint Select Committee of the House of Lords and the
House of Commons on the Stage Plays (Censorship)
together with the Proceedings of the Committee,
Minutes of Evidence, and Appendices. Bluebook
#214, pp. 46-53. Wells, in A Bibliography of the
Books and Pamphlets of George Bernard Shaw, p. 23,
reports that Shaw's remarks also appear in "Censor-
ship and Licensing (Joint Select Committee) Verbatim
Report of Proceedings," The Stage, London, 1909.
address; text and extract
reported available
annual meeting of the British Union for the Abolition
of Vivisection
Letter from Laurence, November 25, 1957. Source
cited: New York Anti-Vivisection Society, 1909;
extract in The New Age, 1909.
July 15, 1909 speech reported; text may be
available
167
second Erewhon dinner
Single sentence quotation in Rattray, Bernard Shaw:
A Chronicle, indicates possible existence of text
or summary.
October 11, 1909 speech text available
Progressive League Demonstration, City Temple, London
"The Ideal of Citizenship"
PP, pp. 74-82 and RS, pp. 20-28. Credited source:
appendix to "popular edition" of the Reverend R. J.
Campbell's The New Theology, London, 1909.
September or portion of speech quoted; summary
October, 1910 or text may be available
Memorial Hall, London
on the abolition of destitution and unemployment
MC, p. 785, quotes portion and cites Shaw, “The
Final Ideal for Civic Life," The Christian Common-
wealth, October 12, 1910. A description of Shaw
on the platform and summary of content in John J.
Weisert, "Bahr Describes GBS on the Platform," The
Shaw Review, II (January, 1959), 13-15, apparently
refers to the same speech.
October 3, 1910 description of speech
Antient Concert Rooms, Dublin
"Poor Law and Destitution in Ireland"
Michael J. O'Neill, "Some Shavian Links With Dublin
As Recorded In The Holloway Diaries," The Shaw
Review, II (May, 1959), 5-6.
December 6, 1910 speech text available
Musical Association
168
“The Reminiscences of a Quinquagenarian"
Bernard Shaw, How to Become a Musical Critic, ed.
with an intro. by Dan H. Laurence (New York: Hill
and Wang, 1961), pp. 267-78. Credited source:
Proceedings, 37th Session, 1910-ll; reprinted in
part in The New Music Review, New York, August,
1912. Shaw provided the published report.
May 29, 1911 Speech text available
the Heretics Society, Cambridge
"The Religion of the Future"
RS, pp. 29-37. Credited source: based on news reports
reprinted by the Heretics in a pamphlet dated July 11,
1911. '
June 13, 1911 speech text available
Annual Meeting of the Coal Smoke Abatement Society,
London
"Smoke and Genius"
PP, pp. 82-85. Credit source: the Society's annual
transactions, 1910-ll; reprinted in Smokeless Air,
Winter 1950.
November 30, 1911 speech text available; debate
1911
Memorial Hall, London
"Shaw vs Chesterton"
PP, pp. 86-93. Credited source: The Christian
Commonwealth, December 6 and 13, 1911. Portion
reprinted from Fabian News in Joad, Shaw and
Society, pp. 168-69.
lecturing reported and summarized
on education
1911
March
169
Educational Review, XLII (December, 1911), 533-38.
summary of lecture reported
available
to London Schools Musical and Dramatic Association
"Art in Education"
Letter from Laurence, November 25, 1957. Source
cited: reprinted as leaflet.
21, 1912 speech text available
New Reform Club, London
"Modern Religion I"-
RS, pp. 38-49. Credited source: The Christian
Commonwealth, April 3, 1912; apparently prepared for
publication by Shaw based on reporter's notes. Also
reprinted in The Shavian, II (October, 1961), 11-20.
June 6, 1912 speech text reported available
annual meeting of the British Union for the Abolition
of Vivisection, Caxton Hall, Westminster
"Mr. Bernard Shaw on the Uselessness of the
Vivisection Inspector"
Letter from Laurence, November 25, 1957. Source
cited: pamphlet, London (1912).
October 11, 1912 speech text available
at the War Against Poverty Demonstration, under the
joint auspices of the Independent Labour Party and
The Fabian Society, Albert Hall, London
"The Crime of Poverty"
PP, pp. 93-96. Credited source: The Labour leader,
October 17, 1912.
170
December 6, 1912 speech text available
Memorial Hall, London
"What Irish Protestants Think" or "The Protestants
of Ireland, II"
RS, pp. 50-53, and Bernard Shaw, The Matter with
Ireland, ed. with an intro. by Dan H. Laurence and
David H. Greene (New York: Hill and Wang, 1962),
pp. 71-74. Credited source: pamphlet, What Irish
Protestants Think: Speeches on Home Rule, London,
1912.
January 28, 1913 Speech text available; debate
May 1,
with Hilaire Belloc
Queen's Hall, London
"Property or Slavery?"
PP, pp. 96-99. Credited source: Arthur Charles
Fox-Davies (ed.), The Book of Public Speaking (London:
1913), Vol. V. According to Shaw in the speech "The
Case for Equality," this speech was reported in all
papers except the Times and Daily Mail. Portion
reprinted from Fabian News in Joad, Shaw and Society,
p. 170.
1913 speech text available; includes
critiques of four others and
Shaw's rejoinder
National Liberal Club, London
"The Case for Equality"
Bernard Shaw, The Socialism of Shaw, ed. with an
intro. by James Fuchs (New York: Vanguard Press,
1926), pp. 49-83. Credited sources: publication
of the National Liberal Club Political and Economic
Circle (London, 1913) and Metropolitan Maggzine
New YOrk), December, 1913.
May, 1913 speech reported; text may be
available
171
meeting of the General Committee of the Shakespeare
Memorial Fund
“MC, p. 156, cites the Yorkshire Observer, May 16,
1913.
1913 Speech reported
Oxford University
public lecture on the origin of the drama
Reported by Joad, Shaw, p. 29.
October 20, 1913 verbatim speech text reported
available
"Economics of the Three Arts"
Letter from Laurence, November 25, 1957. Source
cited: The Three Arts Journal, I (November, 1913).
October 30, 1913 speech text available
City Temple
"Christianity and Equality"
RS, pp. 54-59. Credited source: Commonwealth,
November 5, 1913; "in the syllabus of the City
Temple Literary Society for the years 1913-1914,
it was referred to under the title, 'Christian
Economics.'"
February 28, 1914 speech reported
Examination Hall at Oxford
on drama, in which he "extolled Brieux as the
SOphocles of the time"
Reported by Rattray, Bernard Shaw: A Chronicle,
p. 188.
March,
March
June.
172
1914 speech text or summary
reported available
"The Art and Craft of Playwriting"
E. J. West, editor of Shaw on Theatre, p. 296, cites
the Oxford Chronicle, March 6, 1914, p. 7.
26, 1914 brief summary of speech
at a demonstration held for the purpose of advocating
Socialist unity
NYT, March 27, 1914, p. l.
1914 small portion of speech quoted;
text may be available
Congress at the Imperial Institute on Next Steps
in Education
on sex education
Quoted, with no source given, by T. F. Evans, "Shaw
in 1914," The Shavian, II (June, 1964), p. 18.
November 4, 11, Speech texts or summaries reported
18,
1914
1914 available
Kingsway Hall
"Income, Equality, and Idolotry;" "An Examination
of Idolotry;" "Equality and Incentives"
Letter from Laurence, November 25, 1957. Source
cited: special reports of Shaw's Kingsway Hall
Lectures, 1914, Christian Commonwealth.
lecture reported
Kingsway Hall
"Redistribution of Income"
Reported by Pease, The History_of the Fabian Society,
p. 233.
173
October 26, 1915 summary of Speech; text may be
available
Fabian Society, King's Hall, Covent Garden
"Illusions of the War"
NYT, October 28, 1915, p. 3, with briefer report on
October 27. Article states that fullest report is
to be found in The Manchester Guardian.
November 24, 1915 summary of address available
King's Hall
"The World after the War"
NYT, November 25, 1915, p. 1.
December 2, 1915 long summary with excerpts quoted
available
mother's meeting, East London Federation of
Suffragettes, Sylvia Pankhurst presiding
"The Nation's Vitality"
NYT, December 19, 1915, II, 12. Brief report of
this Speech is also found in NYT, December 3, p. 1.
October 27, 1916 speech reported
1916
King's Hall, Covent Garden
"Life"
Reported by MC, p. 848.
text available; "ghosted" speech
for-trial of Roger Casement; delivered in court
after verdict delivered
Shaw, The Matter with Ireland, pp. 119-22.
174
April 23, 1917 paper read; text available
before the Aristotelian Society
"Ethical Principles of Social Reconstruction"
PP, pp. 99-110. Credited sources: Proceedings of
the Aristotelian Society 1916-1917 and The New York
American, July 1 and 8, 1917.
October 20, 1818 brief summary of speech
Abbey Theatre, Dublin
"Equality"
O'Neill, The Shaw Review, II (May, 1959), 7.
October 26, 1918 brief summary of speech
Dublin Literary Society at Little Theatre
"Literature in Ireland" (reading of O'Flaherty, V.C.
originally scheduled)
O'Neill, The Shaw Review, II (May, 1959), 7.
June or July, 1919 speech text available
British Music Society
"The Future of British Music"
Shaw, How to Become a Musical Critic, pp. 303-309.
Credited source: "Starved Arts Mean Low Pleasures"
in The Outlook, July 19 and 26, 1919.
October, 1919 text of very Short Speech available
before drama critics assembled at performance of
Heartbreak House at Royal Court Theatre, London
MC, p. 627. Credited source: The Daily News, August
19, 1921. A discrepancy exists, however, in that
175
Henderson also stated the play opened October 18 and
critics assembled the following Wednesday.
November 13, 1919 Speech text available
under auspices of the Hampstead Ethical Institute,
Hampstead Conservatoire, London
"Modern Religion" or "Modern Religion II"
PP, pp. 110-130, and RS, pp. 60-80. Credited source:
The New Commonwealth, Supplement, January 2, 1920.
November 21, 1919 speech text available
Ruskin Centenary Exhibition, held at the Royal
Academy of Arts, London
"Ruskin's Politics"
PP, pp. 130-144. Credited source: book of that
title issued by the Ruskin Centenary Council,
London, 1921.
November 28, 1919 speech text available
March
The Fabian Society
"Socialism and Ireland"
Shaw, The Matter with Ireland, pp. 214-232. Credited
source: published as Supplement to The New Common-
wealth, December 12, 1919.
18, 1920 text of Speech available
Union Society of University College, London
"Foundation Oration"
PP, pp. 144-61. Credited source: verbatim report
issued by the Society as a pamphlet in 1920 with
corrections made by Shaw in 1929 incorporated into
the text.
176
May 6, 1920 text of speech available
National Conference of the British Music Society,
London
"The Needs of Music in Britain"
PP, pp. 161-64. Credited source: British Music
Bulletin, November, 1920.
May 25, 1921 speech reported
Society of Authors
NYT, May 26, 1921, p. 1.
September 12, 1921 text of Opening remarks as
chairman available
public meeting under the auspices of the Egypt
Parliamentary Committee, Mortimer Halls, London
"British Democracy and Egypt"
PP, pp. 164—68. Credited sources: The Muslim
Standard, September 29, 1921; reprinted in The New
York Call, October 14, 1921.
November 30, 1921 Text available of what is called
by Shaw the "substance of an
extemporized speech"
Tolstoy Commemoration at Kingsway Hall, London
"Tolstoy: Tragedian or Comedian?"
Bernard Shaw, Pen Portraits and Reviews, pp. 260-66.
Shaw indicates copyright is held by International
Magazine Co., New York, 1921.
January 18, 1922 summary of comments
British Royal Academy of Literature
comments accompanying vote of thanks to Maurice
177
Donnay, the lecturer of the day
The Times (London), January 19, 1922, p. 8.
September, 1922 speech summarized with portions
quoted
Abernethia Society of St. Thomas's Hospital
"The Advantages of Being Unregistered"
NYT, September 17, 1922, II, 10. Account sent to
NYT by correspondent of the American Medical
Association.
October 4, 1922 text reported
University College, London
on phonetics
\
MC, p. 858, cites The Morning Post, October 5, 1922.
November 18, 1923 lecture reported
Crosby Hall, London
"Saint Joan of Arc"
MC, pp. 599-600, refers to this speech.
late 1923 excerpts of speech available
Vegetarian Society of London University
NYT, December 9, 1923, IV, 10.
May 31, 1924 text of address reportedly
available
annual assembly, the English Association at Bedford
College, Regent's Park, London
MC, p. 858, cites the Manchester Guardian, June 2,
1924.
178
May, 1925 partial summaries available
King's College, Strand
vote of thanks following speech by Granville-Barker
Two very different summaries exist: Ervine, p. 345,
and Pearson, G. B. S., a Postscript, p. 114.
June, 1925 debate text available
debate with Hilaire Belloc at Savoy Theatre
"What Is Coming?"
NYT, June 28, 1925, IX, 1.
November, 1925 extensive excerpts of text
available
Fabian Society
last of series on "Freedom and Authority in the
Socialist Commonwealth"
NYT, December 20, 1925, VIII, 3.
1926 report of speech;text may be
available
London Rotary Club
Rattray, p. 161, quotes briefly from this Speech.
April, 1926 toast reportedly available
Stratford-upon-Avon
on Shakespeare
E. J. West, editor of Shaw on Theatre, p. 29, cites
Lawrence Stuckey, "Man and Superman," Drama (Chicago)
XVII (March, 1926). pp. 205-206.
179
July 26, 1926 text available
Parliamentary Labor Party in London
"Socialism at Seventy; a Birthday Speech" or "On
His Seventieth Birthday"
Shaw, The Socialism of Shaw, pp. 147-55, and Lewis
COpeland (ed.), The World's Great Speeches (2nd rev.
ed.; New York: Dover, 1958), pp. 208-11.
1926 ‘ recording reportedly available
on Shakespeare
at British Theatre Museum according to "Other
Intelligence Theatrical," The Shavian, II (February,
1960). pp. 35-36.
November 24, 1926 extensive (full newspaper page)
extracts of speech available
Fabian Society
"Cultural Internationalism"
NYT December 12, 1926, IX, 3; brief extracts also
in NYT, November 25, 1926, p. 27.
January 27, 1927 text of introduction and of
summation available
Kingsway Hall, London; also broadcast over BBC
Chairman of a debate between G. K. Chesterton and
Lady Rhondda on "The Menace of the Leisured Woman"
Introduction in Ashley H. Thorndike (ed.), Modern
Eloquence, Vol. XV (rev. ed. New York: P. F. Collier
& Son Corporation, 1936), 157-60; Summation pp. 167-
71. Reported source: NYT.
Summation in PP, pp. 168-171. Credited source:
Time and Tide, February 4, 1927.
180
February 11, 1927 , summary with excerpts available
March
at opening of the OsteOpathic Clinic for the poor
NYT, February 12, 1927, p. 4.
18, 1927 Speech text available
BBC broadcast
"Beethoven's Centenary"
Shaw, Pen Portraits and Reviews, pp. 30-35; reprinted
from The Radio Times, March 18, 1927. MC, p. 199,
reports it also appeared in the New York American,
March 20, 1927.
May 20, 1927 speech text available
in behalf of the Cecil Houses Fund, in the King's
Theatre, Hammersmith
"Woman--Man in Petticoats"
PP, pp. 172-78. Sources credited: New York Times
Magazine, June 19, 1927; reprinted in the Cecil
Houses (Inc.) Report 1927/8.
June 16, 1927 Speech summary available
International Conference on English, Royal Society
of English
spoke on "no such things as correct English speech"
The Times (London), June 17, 1927, and NYT, June
17. 1927, p. 27.
The speech referred to by MC, p. 858, given before
the Anglo-American Conference on the Preservation of
the English Language, for which Henderson cited NYT,
January 2, 1927, and which could not be found in
the paper of that date, may be the same one noted
above.
181
NYT of June 17, 1927, p. 27, also reports another
speech by Shaw the same night as the one above, but
one which was not completed. As he attempted to
speak for the British Union for the Abolition of
Vivisection, he was "howled down" by medical
students and could not finish his Speech.
November 18, 1927 text available
delivered before a demonstration of §ecrets of
Nature films, in the London Pavilion Theatre
"A Relief from the Romantic Film"
PP, pp. 178-83. Credited source: The Illustrated
London News, December 3, 1927.
November 23, 1927 summary of speech by Shaw
available
Kingsway Hall, Kingsway, Holborn
"Democracy as a Delusion"
Advertisement of Fabian Society; reproduced c0py by
courtesy of Dan H. Laurence.
late 1927 or
January, 1928 recording and text available
"Spoken English and Broken English"
Commercial recording: Linguaphone, SHIE; also
brochure with text
Text is also available in NYT, January 15, VIII, l4,
and in Shaw, On Language (ed., with an intro. and
notes by Abraham Tauber; foreword by James Pitman;
New York: PhilOSOphical Library, 1963), pp. 56-64.
February 11, 1928 speech text reported available
at opening of OsteOpathic Association Clinic
"G. B. S. on Osteopathy"
182
Letter from Laurence, November 25, 1957. Source
cited: pamphlet.
1928 debate with Chesterton; text
available
"Do We Agree?â€
Published as separate volume: Chesterton, G. K. and
Bernard Shaw, Do We Agree? Hartford, Conn.: Mitchell,
1928, and London: Palmer, 1928.
June, 1928 (?) brief comments summarized and
available
Movietone appearance
NYT, June 26, 1928, p. 28.
June 8, 1928 Speech text available
before the Special General Conference of the Chief
Constables' Association, held at Harrogate
"Censorship AS a Police Duty"
PP, pp. 183-200. Credited source: Conference
Reports, 1928.
November 22, 1928 Shaw's summary and stenographic
report in part (full newSpaper
page) available
The Fabian Society, Kingsway Hall, Kingsway, Holborn
"The Future of Western Civilization"
Shaw's summary in advertisement of Fabian Society;
reproduced c0py courtesy of Dan H. Laurence. Text
in NYT, December 9, 1928, XI, 5.
December 7, 1928 text (excerpts) available
The Royal Academy of Dramatic Art at the Academy
183
Theatre, London; BBC broadcast
"Bernard Shaw Talks about Actors and Acting"
Shaw, Shaw on Theatre, pp. 186-198. Credited source
of verbatim report: NYT, January 6, 1929.
August 5, 1929 extensive excerpts available
British Independent Labour Party's Summer School
at Welwyn in Herfordshire
"Defines Socialism As Work for Everybody"
NYT, August 25, IX, p. 4, 9. Shorter summary with
excerpts appears in NYT, August 6, 1929.
September 13, 1929 text available
the third International Congress of the World
League for Sexual Reform, held in the Wigmore Hall
"The Need for Expert Opinion in Sexual Reform"
PP, pp. 200-207. Credited sources: Sexual Reform
Congress, ed. Norman Hare, London, 1930; an unauthor-
ized verbatim report, at variance with the official
text as approved by Shaw, appeared in Time and Tide,
September 20, 1929. Text also published in The
Regional, II (December, 1959).
October 11, 1929 text available
"Speech as Guest of Honor at London Critics Circle
Annual Luncheon"
Shaw, Shaw on Theatre. Source credited: NYT,
October 12, 1929.
October 14, 1929 stenographic text available
BBC address
on Democracy
184
Stenographic text in NYT, November 3, 1929, pp. 1, 9.
Brief excerpts in NYT, October 15, 1929, p. 8. Text
also in Shaw's Preface to The Apple Cart.
November 21, 1929 Shaw's summary and extensive
excerpts from stenographic
report available
Fabian Society, Kingsway Hall, Kingsway, Holborn
"Random Speculations"
Shaw's summary in advertisement of Fabian Society;
reproduced c0py courtesy of Dan H. Laurence. Text
in NYT, December 15, 1929, XI, 8.
January 31, 1930 excerpts of Speech available
British Drama League, Kingsbury Hall
plea for a national theatre
NYT, February 1, 1930, p. 14. Letter from Laurence,
November 25, 1957, reports that this also appears in
Drama, VIII (March, 1930).
October 28, 1930 Text available
banquet given in honor of Einstein
"Religion and Science"
RS, pp. 81-88. The editor states that the next day's
New York Times and Manchester Guardian carried some-
what differing abridgements and that the recording
made of the speech had lapses in it; the text in
this collection is based on all three sources.
October 30, 1930 verbatim Speech text reported
available
on behalf of the building fund of the settlement
"Mansfield House Settlement: A Speech by George
185
Bernard Shaw"
Letter from Laurence, November 25, 1957. Source
cited: Pamphlet, London, 1930.
November 14, 1930 speech reported; text may be
available
before Art Workers' Guild
on art
MC, p. 188, quotes portion and refers to The Observer
(London), November 16, 1930.
November 28, 1930 brief excerpts available
Fabian Society
on defects in Labour Government
NYT, November 28, 1930, p. 2.
early 1931 text or summary may be available
New York Times Index reports speech published on
June 7, 1931, IX, 2; first two pages of section of
this issue of NYT missing from microfilm c0pies
of newspaper.
May, 1931 Speech text available; described
as verbatim report
London, Institute of Journalists
"G. B. S. and the 'Time Lag'"
E. J. West, editor of Shaw on Theatre, p. 297 reports
this is available in the Manchester Guardian, May 9,
1931. Appears to be same speech as in Living Age,
CCCXL (July, 1931), 507-508.
May 16, 1931 brief excerpts available
186
Letchworth
"Libraries and the English Language"
NYT, May 17, 1931, p. 22.
May 30, 1931 speech text available
BBC
"Saint Joan"
PP, pp. 208-216. Credited source: The Listener,
June 3, 1931. Reprinted in The Listener, January 14,
1954.
July 25, 1931 small portion of speech available
Leningrad
on Lenin
NYT, July 28, 1931, p. 6.
July 27, 1931 text available
Speech for simultaneous radio broadcast and motion
picture filming, Moscow
"Lenin"
PP, pp. 216-18. Credited source: The Left Review,
December, 1934.
August 5, 1931 speech text available
Independent Labour Party National Summer School,
Digwell Park
"The Only HOpe of the World"
PP, pp. 218-26. Credited source: The New Leader
(London), August 7, 1931. Summary with excerpts
also appears in NYT, August 6, 1931, p. 11.
187
August, 1931 speech reported; text may be
available
National Theatre Guild, Winter Gardens, Malvern
MC, p. 156, cites Worcester Daily News, August 20,
1931.
October 11, 1931 Speech text available
Shortwave broadcast to the United States from London
"Look, You Boob! A Little Talk on America"
PP, pp. 226-34. Credited source: pamphlet by the
Friends of the Soviet Union, London, December 15,
1931; unexpurgated text was published in New York
American, October 12, 1931. Text also in NYT,
October 12, 1931.
October 23, 1931 Speech reported; text may be
available
Caxton Hall, Westminster, London
â€Drink"
MC, p. 776, cites the Manchester Guardian, October
23, 1931.
November 26, 1931 Speech excerpts available
Fabian Society
on Russia
NYT, November 27, 1931, p. 19.
February, 1932 speech text available
first broadcast relayed throughout Union of South
Africa
"The Dangers of a 'Sun Trap'"
188
The Shavian, I (October, 1959), pp. 2-7. Reprinted
from Cape Times, February 8, 1932.
June, 1932 excerpts from speech available
before the October Club, Oxford
on youth and revolution
NYT, June 19, 1932, VIII, 2.
July 11, 1932 speech text and portion of record-
ing available
BBC broadcast
"Rungs of the Ladder"
R. F. Bosworth, "Shaw Recordings at the B. B. C.,"
The Shaw Review, VII (May, 1964), p. 43; recording
information: Lit. No. 129; 6'4" (Homo 110). Text
in entirety in The Listener, July 20, 1932.
November 25, 1932 speech text available
"In Praise of Guy FaWkes"
Fabian Society, Kingsway Hall
PP, pp. 235-58. Credited sources: The New Clarion,
December 3 and 10, 1932, reprinted in Where Stands
Socialism Today, London, 1933. Extensive excerpts
also appear in NYT, December 11, 1932, VIII, 4, with
summary and limited excerpts in NYT, November 25,
19320 p. 19.
February 12, 1933 speech text available; verbatim
report of "the main parts in full"
to students of the University of Hongkong
"Universities and Education"
PP, pp. 259-261. Credited source: The New York Times,
189
March 26, 1933.
April 11, 1933 speech text available
American Academy of Political Science, New York City
U. S. publication: Bernard Shaw, The Future of
Political Science in America (New York: Dodd, Mead,
1933).
British publication: The Political Madhouse in
America and Nearer Homei a Lecture (London:
Constable, 1933).
Text also in NYT, April 12, 1933.
Shaw's notes for this lecture are at Cornell Uni-
versity, Ithaca, New York.
September 23, 1933 speech text available
Friends House, Euston Road, London
"Bradlaugh and Today"
RS, pp. 89-93. Credited source: pamphlet issued
for the Centenary Committee by C. A. Watts & Co.,
Ltd., and The Pioneer Press.
November 23, 1933 extensive excerpts from the
stenographic report available
Fabian Society
"The Politics of Unpolitical Animals"
NYT, December 10, IX, 2. Brief excerpts in NYT,
November 24, 1933, p. 14.
November 28, 1933 text (verbatim report) and
recording available
British Drama League Conferences, Edinburgh
"Playwrights and Amateurs"
190
Recording report in Bosworth, The Shaw Review, VII,
43: Lit. No. 130; total i' 12" (12 (RM6607).
Published text in Shaw, Shaw on Theatre, pp. 228-
236. Credited source: Drama XII, December, 1933.
February 6, 1934 recording text available
1934
1934
BBC broadcast
"Whither Britain“
Recording report in Bosworth, The Shaw Review, VII,
43-44: Lit. No. 120; total 32' 13" (12RM65221).
Bosworth also reports this was published by the
Labour Party in 1934 under the title "Are We
Heading for War?"
Published text: The Listener, XI (February 7, 1934),
215-l6+. Script: archives the The Shaw Society,
London, according to The Shavian, No. 4, N.S., p. 27.
test reported available
New Zealand
"What I Said in New Zealand"
Letter from Laurence, November 25, 1957. Source
cited: What I Said in New Zealand (Wellington,
New Zealand, 1934); Rare Books of New York Public
Library.
summary of Speech with excerpts
Ayot St. Lawrence Women's Institute
"How to Quarrel Properly"
Allan Chappelow (ed.), Shaw the Villagpr and Human
Being; A Biographical Symposium (London: Charles
Skilton Ltd., 1961). PP. 98-100.
August, 1934 text reportedly available
191
Great Malvern
"How Shaw Writes his Plays"
MC, p. 748, quotes from Sheffield Daily Telegraph,
August 15, 1934.
January 20, 1935 text available
BBC broadcast
"Film Censorship"
PP, pp. 261-62. Credited source: The Listener,
January 30, 1935.
June 18, 1935 text available
BBC broadcast
"Freedom"
PP, pp. 263-70. Credited sources: The Listener,
June 26, 1935; reprinted in Freedom, London, 1936.
December 7, 1935 text available
July,
Congress of Peace and Friendship with the U. S. S. R..
London
"Britain and the Soviets"
PP, pp. 270-73. Credited source: Britain and the
Soviets, London, 1936.
1936 text available
special talk filmed for the motion picture, "B.B.C.,
the Voice of Britain"
"Truth by Radio"
PP, pp. 273-75. Credited source: amended for
publication in World Film News, July, 1936.
192
June 11, 1937 recording and text available
BBC broadcast for Sixth Form students
"School"
Recording report in Bosworth, The Shaw Review, VII,
44: LP 26401, 16' 03" (12FR0106289).
Text: PP, pp. 275-82. Credited source: The
Listener, June 23, 1937.
November 2, 1937 recording and text available
April
BBC shortwave broadcast to the Empire from London
known under various titles: "As I See It," "So
Long, So Long", "This Danger of War," "Shaw Speaks
on War," "Religion and War"
Recordings available: commercial by Heritage; Bos-
worth, The Shaw Review, VII, 44 reports that the BBC
recording is of better quality: Lit. No. 9600,
(12RH37920). Recording of good quality also avail-
able at National Voice Library, Michigan State
University.
Texts: PP, pp. 282-86. Credited sources: The
Listener, November 10, 1937 and Vital Speeches of
the Day, November 15, 1937. Also, RS, pp. 94-99.
Additional credited sources: Sarett & Foster (eds.),
Modern Speeches on Basic Issues (1939) and The
Shavian, I (December, 1953).
18, 1938 text of Speech and recording of
extracts available, manuscript
BBC broadcast; The National Theatre; Handing over
deeds of Site
"Prologue to The Dark Lady"
Recording of extracts: Bosworth, The Shaw Review,
VII, 44: Lit. No. 1794, (BBC2743).
Text: The Listener, XIX (April 27, 1938), 883, 914;
June,
May,
193
and Shaw, Prefaces, pp. 770-72.
Original manuscript in T. E. Hanley collection. See
The Shaw Bulletin, I (May, 1952), 13.
1940 text of Speech available
intended for a BBC broadcast but "cancelled" by the
British Ministry of Information
"The Unavoidable Subject"
PP, pp. 286-92. Credited source: Anthony Weymouth,
Journal of the War Years (1939-1945) and One Year
After, 1948.
1941 text of speech available; may be
verbatim report
for film version of Major Barbara (may have been
filmed)
"George Bernard Shaw Presents Major Barbara"
Guy R. Lyle and Kevin Guinagh, I Am Happy to Present
(New York, 1953), pp. 60-62. E. J. West, editor of
Shaw on Theatre, p. 297, reports text can be found
in Variety, May 21, 1941, and The New York Times,
June 1, 1941, Magazine section, p. 7.
July 26, 1944 very brief recording available
BBC broadcast
"Shaw Greets Visitors on his Eighty-Sixth Birthday"
Bosworth, The Shaw Review, VII, 44: LP26092 (10FRM
105087).
July 26, 1946 text and recording available
BBC broadcast and television filming at Ayot St.
Lawrence
"Goodbye, Goodbye"
194
Recording: Bosworth, The Shaw Review, VII, 45: Lit
No. 10595, 12RH43418.
Text: PP, pp. 292-94. Credited source: edited from
an unpublished transcript of the verbatim text.
October 9, 1946 recording available
recorded for broadcast by BBC (Shaw too feeble to
attend ceremonies)
"Receives the Freedom of the Borough of St. Pancras"
Bosworth, The Shaw Review, VII, 45: Lit No. 9822,
(12RM39366). MC quotes a portion of this Speech,
pp. 263-64. Recording also available at National
Voice Library, Michigan State University.
November 12, 1947 recording of extracts of a
dialogue available
BBC broadcast
London Theatre; with C. B. Cochran
Bosworth, The Shaw Review, VII, 45-46: Lit. No.
11312 (12RH46883).
1948 verbatim speech text available
religious service dedicating a new gate at ruins of
abbey at Ayot St. Lawrence
Chappelow, Shaw the Villager, pp. 267-68.
date unknown portion Of speech reported
available
on political intervention in local government:
"Discard the Party System"
Letter from Laurence, November 25, 1957. Source
cited: "Party Welfare or Public Welfare?" Citizen,
II (January-February, 1948).
195
Summary
Although this list of speeches may appear impres-
sive, the number falls far Short of the total of approxi-
mately 2000 usually attributed to Shaw.l Of the entries
numbering nearly 175, approximately two-thirds are verified
texts, portions of texts, or summaries of speeches. In
addition, nearly half of the remaining entries are of text
or summaries which are reported available but are difficult
to obtain, primarily because they are in private collections
or in British newspapers. The remaining entries are, for
the most part, of speeches for which date and occasion have
been found and which may furnish a guide for future trac-
ing of texts as well as for observations regarding audiences
and selection of subjects.
Even though these entries constitute less than ten
percent of the total number of Speeches attributed to Shaw,
however, certain observations regarding the audience, sub-
ject choices, and suggestions for further study can be made.
Audiences
While only limited conclusions can be drawn regard-
ing audiences, the entries tend to bear out statements made
in biographies and critical studies of Shaw: that he spoke
l
Laurence in "Introduction," Shaw, Platform and
Pulpit, p. xiv.
196
to diverse audiences. The only generalized classification
of audiences which appears with any regularity is that of
the Fabian Society, although even such Situations consti-
tute less than a fifth of the entries noted. The factor
of greatest interest, then, in examining the Speech list-
ings in detail is the range of audience situations which
are represented.
Selection of subjects
Subjects represented by the entries can be put into
the following broad groups: politics, the arts, religion,
education, and medicine (including vegetarianism and vivi-
section). Conclusions regarding proportionate relation-
ships among subject choices indicated by the entries are
difficult to make for two basic reasons: more than one
subject is dealt with in a single speech; and subjects
could not be determined for all entries made. Within these
limitations, however, we can note that over one-half of the
entries deal basically with political subjects, nearly one-
third with the arts, and the rest with the other three cate-
gories. Before any estimate can be made as to whether these
subject choices indicated by the entries are representative,
the entries should be examined in light of statements made
in Chapter I of this study.
The chronological divisions of Chapter I important
197
at this point are: 1898, the year Shaw decided to curtail
his public Speaking; 1914, the year World War I began and
Shaw's political expressions became extremely unpOpular,
although he eventually reached great heights of popularity;
and 1931, the year of his Moscow visit and apparent change
in his avowed political point of View.1
Although the bulk of Shaw's speaking, according to
biographers and Shaw himself, occurred in the pre-1898
period, only a small portion of the entries on the list
belong to this period. Even more important, only 10% of
the established texts are from this period; and cursory
examination reveals very few, if any, verbatim reports.
Although political Speeches dominate this portion of the
entires, the number is too few to make any judgment of
subject choice; Shaw's own statements regarding subjects
are just as valid. Furthermore, this very limited sampling
of speeches available for the years prior to 1898 means that
all studies of Shaw as a Speaker must approach with great
1Another date which might have had an effect on this
study if Shaw had acted on his statement was that of Shaw's
"retirement" from public speaking. It is fortunate that
Shaw did not retire on his sixty-seventh birthday (see p. 87),
for over 40% of all entries and over half of the verified
texts are post-1923.
AS pointed out earlier, detailed examination of
all entries to determine the extent of revisions in publish-
ed texts was not a part of this study. Nevertheless, ver-
batim reports were noted whenever the speech source made
a statement to that effect.
198
care conclusions drawn from the Speeches themselves.
A characteristic of both the 1898-1914 and 1914-
1931 periods regarding subject choices should be pointed
out, for they may have bearing on the over-all balance of
subject choice. Even though the early years of each period
were dominated by political activity, either as bourough
councillor or as a critic of the government, in both
periods, non-political subjects outnumber political ones in
the entries. Furthermore, Since the greatest number of
total entries is for these two periods, they have the
greatest effect on the prOportionS represented by the full
list.
Next, Shaw was seventy-five years of age when he
made the Moscow visit, the point selected for the last
chronological division mentioned earlier. The extent
speeches for this period, however, are disprOportionate to
Shaw's overall Speaking activity: considering verified
texts and recordings only, the post-1931 entries constitute
nearly 30% of the total. Thus, although the presence of a
greater number of verbatim texts and recordings in this
period offers the most material for studies emphasizing
factors of style and delivery, they represent neither 30%
of all his Speeches nor his "prime" years; and great care
must be exercised in drawing conclusions from them.
199
In summary regarding subject choices, then, only
limited conclusions can be drawn. The entries indicate
Shaw's wide range of subjects covering political matters,
the arts, religion, education, and aspects of medicine.
Although political Speeches account for only Slightly more
than fifty per cent of the entries, this does not appear
to be an accurate proportion: in the light of other in-
formation available, political speaking seems to have been
much more dominant. Finally, entries from the post-1931
period account for a disprOportionate number of available
speech texts.
§uggestions for further study
The most obvious suggestion which can be made, of
course, is that of continued search for Shavian Speeches,
particularly from the early period of Shaw's life. It is
hOped that entries of reported Speeches can aid in this
search.
The second suggestion is for a textual study of the
speeches. The entries indicate that for a few speeches, at
least, both verbatim reports, as well as recordings, and
texts approved by Shaw do exist. Although such instances
1The publication of Dan H. Laurence's proposed
bibliography of Shaw Should prove to be extremely helpful
in the completion of the list of Shaw Speeches.
200
are minimal, they may give some indications of the nature of
changes which he made when preparing Speech texts for publi-
cation.
If such a study is made, further stylistic studies
can be attempted. Although many have commented on Shaw's
Speaking style, no study in depth has been made, primarily
because textual accuracy must first be determined.
The next suggestion for further study is coupled
with observations made in the preceding chapter, where
Shaw's theories of speech as derived from his comments on
public speaking were described. Although a number of his
stated theories might be selected, two in particular suggest
fertile ground for determining whether he practiced those
theories: audience adaptation and supporting material.
Even though the number of available speeches is not exten-
sive and even though the limitations indicate earlier must
be kept in mind, the sampling may prove sufficient to war-
rant a study to determine Shaw's practice regarding audience
adaptation and supporting material.
Finally, enough material may be available to trace
possible changes in Shaw's presentation of the subject of
Socialism to an audience. While it is unfortunate, of
course, that so few of his early Speeches on Socialism are
available, nevertheless, speeches on this subject appear
201
with such adequate frequency, it seems as to make possible
a study of the alterations he may have made due to changes
in prevailing Opinions or, perhaps, to adjustments in his
own point of view.
Thus, the Speeches Of Shaw suggest at least the
following additional studies: textual investigations, more
complete inquiries into speaking style, theory-practice
questions (concerning audience analysis, the use of evi-
dence, etc.), and detailed analyses of his Speeches on
Socialism.
CHAPTER IV
A CASE STUDY: "ON DEMOCRACY"
B. B. C. RADIO BROADCAST, OCTOBER 14, 1929
Although case studies of Speeches can serve a num-
ber of functions in the study of public speakers, this case
study of a Speech by Bernard Shaw is presented for one basic
purpose: to analyze a Shavian Speech through the case study
method for purposes of discovering all of the elements which
are commonly revealed by the process of complete rhetorical
criticism. While care must be exercised that the conclu-
sions which result from this case study are not interpreted
as Shaw's practices as a public Speaker in all situations,
a case study of a single speech can serve a useful function
in the study of a speaker. Of primary importance is the
Opportunity it affords for noting the nature of the deci-
sions made by a Speaker as revealed by the analysis of the
speech in depth; such information can add greater dimen-
sions to an understanding of the Speaker as described in
lConditions which prohibit at this time a thorough
sampling and, subsequently, complete evaluation of speeches
are discussed on pages 195-201.
202
203
the previous chapters, particularly in relationship to
theories developed in Chapter II. Secondly, Since a man of
such world-wide fame stimulated numerous judgments of him,
a case study can serve to corroborate or refute judgments,
often stated absolutely, about Shaw as a speaker which have
been unaccompanied by studies in depth. Although the re-
sults of a single study, of course, cannot be taken with
absolute finality regarding Shaw's practices, they can pro-
vide a basis for comparison with conclusions made by others.1
With this basic limitation in mind--that the follow-
ing analysis does not purport to hypothesize about Shaw's
speeches on all occasions--this case study will attempt to
illustrate various aspects of Shaw's Speaking in one in-
stance as the following matters are presented: (1) justi-
fication for selection of "On Democracy;" (2) the speaking
occasion; (3) textual variations; (4) the substance out-
line; (5) Disposition; (6) Invention, including use of
proofs; (7) Style; and (8) response. In addition, a col-
lated text and work Sheets used in the preparation of this
chapter are included in the Appendix.
1This paper will not attempt to make such direct
comparisons with judgments of Shaw as a speaker for two rea-
sons: agreement with or refutation of other judgments may
be interpreted as giving an air of finality to observations
made in this case study; and comments about Shaw as a Speaker
are so widespread that any selective process employed could
easily distort the purpose of this study.
204
Justification for Selection of
"On Democracy"
Since only one speech has been selected for analy-
sis, the reasons for the choice of "On Democracy" should be
explained.
A first,though comparatively minor, reason is the
relative accessibility of the speech text: it is found
in the Preface to The Apple Cart and, in a slightly differ-
ent version, in The New York Times of November 3, 1929.
Furthermore, since one is a stenographic report and the
other a version published by Shaw himself subsequent to
the delivery Of the speech, an opportunity exists for not-
ing the type of revisions which Shaw may have made in the
text.
Moreover, although no claim is made that the speech
is typical of its genre, the political topic makes it a
part of that broad category of political speeches which
formed the bulk of Shaw's subject choices during his
Speaking career.
.Finally, the speech represents Shaw's first broad-
cast address devoted tO political issues after the lifting
of the ban on B. B. C.'S broadcasting of controversial sub-
jects, although as noted in Chapter III, this was not Shaw's
first experience before the radio micr0phone.
For these reasons, this Speech was selected for the
205
case study.
The Speaking Occasion
Shaw undoubtedly looked forward to the Oppor-
tunity to address a nationwide audience on the subject which
concerned him so greatly. AS evidenced in the Speech he
gave on his seventieth birthday, he had been chafing under
the restrictions against the broadcasting of political con-
troversy.l His objections pertained not only to the theo-
retical matter of the censorship controversy, but also to
the effect which such restrictions had upon him personally,
as is evidenced in the following excerpt from his broad-
cast remarks as chairman of a debate on "The Menace of the
Leisured Woman" between Lady Rhondda and Gilbert K. Chesterton:
Now the condition on which broadcasting is con-
ducted in this country is that nothing of a
controversial nature must be spoken from the
platform or anywhere else, except by members of
the Government. How an animated and possibly
embittered controversy is to be carried on this
evening without either of the Speakers becoming
controversial, I cannot tell you. I am sorry
to say that I cannot undertake to keep order
in that respect, because one Of the conditions
of broadcasting in this country is that I my-
self individually and personally am not to be
allowed to broadcast on any terms whatever.
Therefore my own task is somewhat difficult.
1
See pp. 74-75.
2 .
Cited in Ashley H. Thorndike (ed.), Modern Elo-
guence, Vol. XV (Rev. ed.; New York: P. F. Collier & Son
Corporation, 1936), 157.
206
It is equally probable that Shaw was Optimistic about
the advantageous effects which could result from this Oppor-
tunity to speak on a controversial political subject. He
often commented on the advantages of radio speaking, parti-
cularly for reaching a large and heterogeneous audience
that might never make any effort to come to hear him speak
in person.1 Although the specific make-up of the listening
audience on this particular occasion is not known, it ap-
pears quite likely that Shaw regarded the Situation as an
Opportunity to speak to a broad spectrum of society. Fur-
thermore, even though no statement by Shaw has been found
to this effect, to conjecture that Shaw looked upon this
as an Opportunity to speak directly to the workingman as
he had in his early speaking days is not entirely out of
the realm Of probability.
Since Shaw was addressing the entire nation on a poli-
tical subject, it is important to note the general political
situation of the time, especially since Shaw refers to many
of these incidents in his speech.
Although the first Labour Government under Ramsay
MacDonald in 1924 was Short—lived, primary as a result of
the notorious Zinoviev letters, which supposedly comprised
a Communist attempt to instruct British subjects to provoke
revolution, the Conservatives under Stanley Baldwin's Second
1
See pp. 74-75.
207
Ministry did not survive the 1929 elections; and the Labour
Party again was in the majority in Parliament when Shaw
spoke. Diplomatic relations with Russia, which had been
severed during Baldwin's ministry, were resumed under Ramsay
MacDonald's Second Ministry and were in effect at the time
of Shaw's speech.
Although the General Strike of the mid-twenties was
over, economic conditions were still a problem and were
destined to worsen considerably with the imminent Wall Street
crash in the United States and the Great Depression. The
occasion Of the speech was further colored by the inter-
national situation: although Hitler's 1923 beer hall putch
was abortive and several years were to pass before he as-
sumed the Chancellorship of the Third Reich, Mussolini Was
already in control in Italy. In all, however, it is un-
likely that the vast majority of the British audience to
Which Bernard Shaw addressed himself on October 14, 1929,
was particularly concerned with international events.
Textual Variations
AS a collation of two versions of Shaw's radio broad-
l . .
cast of October 14, 1929, Shows, many discrepanCies eXist
between the two texï¬sselected: that found in Shaw's Preface
l .
See Appendix, pp. 274-307.
208
to The Apple Cart (hereafter called the Preface text) and
the stenographic report appearing in The New York Times of
November 3, 1929 (hereafter called the Times text). Although
the implications of textual variations will be discussed
subsequently as they apply to Disposition, Invention, and
Style, two points should be considered at this stage: the
nature of the variations in the two texts and the relative
accuracy of each text in recording the Speech as delivered.
The nature of the variations
Especially because even a cursory glance at the colla-
tion indicates a number Of differences, a classification of
the types of variations can be helpful in focusing upon
changes which affect the analysis of the Speech.
First, a few of the differences are concerned with
variations in single words wherein the root is the same
but the form varies, such as in the case of "democratic"
and "Democrats," "Tory†and "Tories," "while†and "whilst,"
and "Opposite" and "Opposition." Other single-word varia-
tions are more extreme, and involve words with noticeable
changes in meaning, such as "proud" and "prodigious,"
"presence" and "perils." Many of these differences could
be accounted for by errors in either recording or trans-
cribing the stenographic report, Since the initial sounds
209
of each word are similar.1
Another category of difference in the two texts is that
of words, phrases, and even clauses which appear in the
Preface text but not in the Times text. These differences,
which are numerous, cannot be accounted for easily and con-
clusively. Some of these differences could be the result of
the failure of the stenographer to record every word of
Shaw's: many references have been made of the difficulty
of taking Shavian dictation.2 On the other hand, not all
of the added material in the Preface text appears to be
the result of lapses in transcription: it is likely that
some material was added by Shaw when the manuscript was
being prepared for publication. While it is impossible
on the basis of textual analysis to determine the circum-
stances of the added material in the Preface text in many
cases, the parenthetical reference to Lincoln on pages
280-281, for example, appears to have been added after
delivery; and the same may be true of other shorter pas-
1
It is unlikely that differences would be the re-
sult of misunderstanding Shaw. As one listens to a Shaw
recording, the absolute clarity of his articulation is
immediately noticeable.
2Although Shaw himself has said that he Speaks
rapidly, one does not get that impression from listening
to a recording. .It is only as one listens carefully and
realizes that rate is determined by both time devoted to
pauses as well as sounds, does it become noticeable that
Shaw's pauses are extremely short. This characteristic
of Shaw's Speaking could account for the difficulty in
taking stenographic reports of his Speeches.
210
sages which occur in the Preface text but not in the Times
text.
While they are not as numerous, a few passages
appear in the Times text which are not in the Preface text.
Consisting largely of references to recent speeches, they
were probably deleted or altered to exclude reference to
the specific occasion when Shaw prepared the manuscript
for publication.
The final category of differences in the two texts
consists of passages in which there is a series of dis-
crepancies involving words, phrases, and even full sentences
which alter the style in the limited sense Of word choice
and sentence structure and, in a few instances, the content
of the compared statements. Although differences in indi-
vidual words, such as "ghastly" and "monstrous" in one
passage and "gentlemen" and "candidates†in another, are
stylistic changes undoubtedly made by Shaw for publication
of the Preface text, the difference between "cent" and
"thousand" on pagelï¬M affects the meaning though not the
intent of the passage; and it is difficult to determine
which statement actually represents Shaw's statement when
the Speech was delivered. On the other hand, there seems
little doubt that the series of differences, such as those
in the passage on pages 297 and 298 which alter the style,
211
both in use of words and in sentence structure, are pri-
marily the result of changes in the text made by Shaw
subsequent to the delivery Of the speech and prior to the
publication of the Preface.
Although many of the differences of this nature in
the two texts affect only the style in the limited sense
as noted above, the content of one passage in particular
varies considerably in the two versions. This passage is
near the end of the Speech where Shaw gives suggestions
for remedying the problems, as he saw them, which are a
part of the democratic process. While in the Times text
the suggestions made by Shaw are limited to general state-
ments of reforms needed, in the Preface text these sug-
gestions are accompanied by a few details describing the
nature of those reforms. Since in the passage under con-
sideration there are changes in words, sentence structure
and minor changes in arrangement even though content is
similar, it is unlikely that the differences are due to
transcription lapses; the text was probably changed by
Shaw for publication.
Thus, the differences in the two texts center in
(1) material in one text and not in the other, with the
greater number of additions in the Preface text; (2) styl-
istic differences; and (3) a few differences in content
212
which seem to be attributable only to changes made by Shaw
for publication.
The relative accuracy of each text
Unfortunately, no recording of the speech seems to
exist to help clarify the matter of textual discrepancies.
Although no statement regarding Shaw's method of delivering
this particular speech has been found, it is likely that
Shaw extemporized, then used a stenographic report of the
speech as the basis for revisions for publication in the
Preface. This conclusion is based on several factors: the
absence of any reference to a prepared manuscript, an ex-
ception to Shaw's practices which is usually mentioned;
Shaw's practice of using verbatim reports for preparing
speeches for publication; and the number of differences
which are in the realm Of style. Although evidence for
the first two factors has been presented elsewhere in this
paper, the last point merits further attention.
In the Times text we find examples of Shaw's using
combinations such as "extraordinary," "ordinary" and "vest,"
"vast" in the same sentence, repetitions of Similar sound-
ing words which do not appear in the Preface text. Fur-
thermore, not only have a few verb tense discrepancies been
altered, but some compound sentences have been changed to
complex ones. It is unlikely that such differences were
213
the result of stenographic lapses. Since many such styl-
istic changes probably would have been made by Shaw before
delivery had he used a manuscript, it is unlikely that Shaw
delivered this radio Speech from one.
In conclusion, although errors in the stenographic
report undoubtedly exist and these errors cannot always be
pinpointed, the Times text approximates more closely the
Speech as delivered than does the Preface text. Even though
the verbatim report will be given precedence, however, the
Preface text cannot be disregarded completely in the analy-
sis which follows.
The Substance Outline
A procedure similar to that used in the collation
of texts will be used in the substance outline: material
in the Preface text but not in the Times text will be
bracketed, and that in the Times but not in the Preface will
appear above a caret which marks the inserting and which
will be underlined. In harmony with common practice, al-
though Shaw's exact words will Often be used, at times the
language, though not the content, may have been altered in
the preparation of the substance outline.
Purpose sentence
Stated: We must examine democracy in order to
understand it, provide against its
214
dangers as far as we can, and then
consider whether the risks of de-
mocracy are worth taking.
Implied: The risks of a democratic form of
government are not worth taking.
Introduction
A. I am going to talk to you about Democracy objectively.
B. No matter what our points of View may be, let us view
it objectively.
1. We are capable of Speaking of the sea, which is in
some respects rather like democracy, objectively.
a. We all have our own views about the sea.
(1) Some hate it, others love it.
(2) Some regard it as a natural defense,
others as an inconvenience in getting
to the Continet.
b. Certain facts of the sea are quite inde-
pendent of our feelings towards it.
(1) I can take it for granted that the sea
exists.
(2) I can say the sea is sometimes violent
[and those who are most familiar with
it trust it least.]
(a) You don't conclude that I do not
believe in the sea.
(b) You don't conclude that I am an
enemy of the sea.
(c) You don't conclude that I want to
abolish the sea.
(d) You don't conclude I am going to
make bathing illegal.
[_-__
215
(e) You don't conclude I am out to
ruin our carrying trade.
7. . _.
(f) You don't conclude that I am out
to lay waste all our seaside
resorts.
(9) You don't conclude that I am out
to scrap the British Navy.
(3) I can tell you that you cannot breathe
in the sea.
(a) You will not [take that as a
personal insult and] ask me
indignantly if I consider you
inferior to a fish.
2. You must please be equally sensible when I tell
you some hard facts about Democracy.
a. I tell you that it is sometimes furiously
violent and [alwaysl’dangerous and treach-
erous, and those who are familiar With it
trust it least.
(1) You must not at once denounce me as
a paid agent of Benito Mussolini.
(2) You must not declare I have become a
Tory Die-hard in my old age.
(3) You must not accuse me of wanting to
take away your votes and make an end
of parliament, and free Speech, and
L— public meeting, and trial by jury.
(4) You must not cheer me as a champion of
medieval monarchy and feudalism.
Whether we are Democrats or Tories, Communists or
Fascists, we are all face to face with a certain
force in the world called Democracy.
1. We must understand the nature of that force
[whether we want to fight it or to forward it.]
presence _
2. Our business is not to deny the Eperils of]
/\
3.
Body
I.
B.
216
Democracy, but to provide against them as far as
we can.
are pro-
Then we can consider whether the risks we/\[cannot
viding
provide] against are worth taking.
Since most of us don't really know the meaning Of the
term, we Should first attempt to define Democracy (to
Show that government by the peOple is impossible).
A.
One possible way to do so is to ask very many
the
searching questions such as /\[What] are you?
and Where are you?
1. Let us put forth possible answers.
a. My name is Demos.
b. You, my friend Shaw, are a unit of
Democracy: your name is also Demos.
c. I live in the British Empire, the United
States of America, and wherever the
heart of liberty burns in man.
d. You are a citizen of a great democratic
community: you are a potential constit-
uent of the Parliament of Man.
2. I say these answers are nonsense.
a. My name is Bernard Shaw; I don't believe
your name is Demos.
b. My address is at such and such a number
in such and such a street in London;
you have no address.
c. It will be time enough to discuss my seat
in the Parliament Of Man when that cele-
brated institution comes into existence.
Although I am too polite to call Demos a wind-bag,
a gasbag .
or a hot air merchant, I think you will admit that
217
the balhxxias an image of Democracy corresponds to the
actual
[parliamentary facts.]
1. A big balloon is filled with gas or hot air..
2. It is sent up so you shall be kept looking
up at the Sky whilst other people pick your
pockets.
3. It is truelyou can have a place in the basket,
but only by throwing out somebody else.
3. When the balloon comes down to earth every
five years or so, you are invited to get
into the basket if you can throw out one
of the peOple who are in it.
a. There are forty million of you and
hardly room for six hundred in the
basket.
b. You can afford neither the time nor
the money.
(1) The balloon goes up again with
much the same lot in it and
__ leaves you where you were before.
Let us examine the subject by means of Lincoln's
definition.
1. Whenever a modern statesman has to find an
excuse for something, for instance a war,
he usually declares it is being urged to
make the world safe for democracy.
a. Lincoln is represented as standing amid the
carnage of the battlefield of Gettysburg,
and declaring that all that Slaughter of
Americans by Americans occurred in order that
Democracy should not perish from the earth.
_b. Lincoln did not really declaim it on the —1
field Of Gettysburg; and the American Civil
War was not fought in defense of any such
principle, but, on the contrary, to enable
one half of the United States to force the
218
not wish to be governed.
[ether half to be governed as they didJ
2. Let us examine each of the three articles of
Lincoln's definition.
a.
b.
C.
It is government eh the peOple.
(l)
(2)
That, evidently, is necessary.
(a) A human community can no more
exist without a government than
a human being can exist without
a coordinated control of its
breathing and blood circulation.
All the monarchs, all the tyrants,
all the dictators, all the Die-hard
Tories are agreed that we must be
governed.
It is government for the peOple.
(l)
(2)
This is most important.
Dean Inge interprets this idea Of
'for the people' in his statement
that Democracy is a form of society
which means equal consideration for
all.
(a) He believes it as a Christian
and so do I.
(b) Therefore, I insist on equality
of income.
(c) Equal consideration for a person
with a hundred a year and one with
a hundred thousand is impossible.
It iS not government hy the people.
(1)
The peOple cannot govern.
(a) The thing is a physical
impossibility.
II.
(2)
ii.
219
Every citizen cannot be
a ruler any more than
every boy can be an engine
driver or a pirate king.
A nation of prime ministers
or dictators is as absurd
as an army of field marshals.
(b) Few peOple are capable of
governing.
i.
ii.
iii.
They cannot write their
own plays.
It is much easier to
write a good play than
to make a good law.
There are not a hundred
men in the world who can
write a play good enough
to stand daily wear and
tear [as long as a law
must.]
It is not and never can be a reality;
it is only a cry by which demagogues
humbug as into voting for them.
We should attempt to save ourselves from being at the
mercy of those who can govern, some of whom may possibly
be grafters and scoundrels.
A.
The primitive answer, that as we are always in
a huge majority and can, if rulers Oppress us
intolerably, burn their houses and tear them
to pieces,
1.
is unsatisfactory.
Decent peOple never do it until they have
quite lost their heads.
a.
When they have lost their heads, they
are likely as not to burn the wrong
house and tear the wrong man to pieces.
Judgment and execution of a ruler or
his scapegoat are acts reguiring a high
220
degree of political intelligence.
When we have what is called a popular move-
ment, very few people who take part in it
know what it is all about.
a. I once saw a real pOpular movement
which appeared quite impressive.
(1) PeOple were running excitedly
through the streets.
(2) Everyone who saw them doing it
immediately joined in the rush.
b. I ascertained afterwards that it was
started by a runaway cow.
c. In Similar fashion, most general
elections are nothing but stampedes.
(l) The last but one was a stampede.
(2) The cow was a Russian one.
Democracy cannot be
A. (REPEAT) [Neither mob Violence nor pOpular move-
ments can be] depended on.
1.
The cases of Nero and Tsar Paul of Russia
both illustrate the failure of people to
take action.
a. Both of them, when they were invested
with absolute powers over their fellow-
creatures, did such appalling things
they had to be killed like mad dogs.
b. However, it was not the people who rose
up and killed them; they were dispatched
quite privately by their own bodyguards.
The case of the DeWitt brothers illustrates
how mobs can kill the wrong person, the
unpppular ones.
a. They were neither tyrants nor autocrats.
F1) One had been imprisoned and tor-
tured for his resistance to the
III.
221
despotism of William of Orange.
(2) The other met him as he came out
L_ of prison. _J
b. The mob was on the side of the autocrat
and tore them to pieces.
Direct action by the revolutionary prole-
tariat is neither direct nor revolutionary
and is usually controlled by police agents.
a. A tyrant can get rid of a troublesome
champion of liberty by raising a hue and
cry against him as an unpatriotic person.
b. The mob takes care of that individual
when the tyrant supplies them with a
well tipped ringleader.
B. Even When we define democracy as government by
the consent of the governed, problems arise.
1.
We want as little government as possible
without getting murdered in our beds.
rates and
a. We regard taxes and [rents and]
death dutie as intolerable burdens.
b. We notice that savages, unruly Arabs,
and Tartars get along with little
governmental imposition.
c. The civilized way of getting along
involves corporate action, which
involves more government.
Government, which used to be a comparatively simple
affair,
today has to manage an enormous develOpment
of Socialism and Communism.
A. Our industrial and social life is set in a huge
communistic framework.
1.
We have public roadways, streets, bridges,
water supplies, power supplies, lighting,
tramways, schools, dockyards, and public
aids and conveniences.
222
proud
2. We employ a A[prodigious] army of police,
inspectors, teachers, and officials of
all grades in hundreds of departments.
We have found by bitter experience that it is
impossible to trust factories, workshOps, and
mines to private management.
1. We had to enforce by constant inspection
an elaborate code of
[stern] laws to stOp monstrous waste of
uman life and welfare.
2. During the war our attempt to leave the
munitioning of the army to private enter-
prise led us to the verge of defeat and
caused an appalling slaughter.
a. Private firms had to be taught how to
do their work economically.
Our big capitalist enterprises cannot manage by
themselves and now run to the Government for
help as a lamb runs to its mother.
1. They cannot even make an extension of the Tube
railway in London without Government aid.
2. Unassisted private capitalism is breaking
down or getting left behind in all directions.
Without government help_
3. Our private enterprises would drop like shot
/\ 1_Socialism and Communism is what we have
' stags [, and we Should all be dead in a month,
already.
if all our Socialism and Communism and the
drastic taxation of unearned incomes which
finances it were to stOp.]
When Mr. Baldwin tried to win the last election
by declaring that Socialism had been a failure,
Socialism went over him like a steam roller and
handed his office to a Socialist Prime Minister.
1. Nothing could save us in the war but [a great
extension] Of Socialism.
IV.
223
Now it is clear enough that only still
greater extension of it can repair the
ravages of the war and keep pace with
the growing requirements of civilization.
The question before us is whether Democracy can keep
pace with the developments of Socialism and Communism
that are being forced on us by the growth of national
and international corporate action.
A.
Corporate action is impossible without a govern-
ing body.
1.
It may be the central Government, a municipal
corporation, a county council, a district
council, a parish council.
It may be the board of directors of a joint
stock company.
It may be the board of directors of a trust
made by combining several joint stock com-
panies.
We are more at the mercy of boards that organize
stock companies than we are at the mercy of
parliament.
1. We are consumers of their services.
2. Several active politicians who began as
liberals and are now Socialists have said
to me that they were converted because of
this choice.
a. The choice is not between governmental
control Of industry and control by
separate private individuals [kept in
order by their competition for our
custom.]
b. The choice is between governmental
control and control by gigantic trusts
wielding great power without responsi-
bility, and having no object but to
make as much money out of us as possible.
3. Our government is having much more trouble
224
with the private corporations on Whom we
are dependent for our coals and cotton
goods than with France or the United
States of America.
We are in the hands of our corporate bodies,
public or private, for the satisfaction of our
everyday needs.
1. Their powers are life and death powers.
2. I need not labor this point: we all know it.
What we do not all realize is that we are equally
dependent on corporate action for the satisfaction
of our religious needs.
1. Dean Inge realizes this.
a. He tells us that our general elections
have become public auctions at which the
contending parties bid against one
another by promising us a larger Share
of the plunder [of the minority.]
b. The Dean's profession obliges him to
urge his congregation always to vote
for the party which pledges itself to
go farthest in enabling those of us
Who have great possessions to sell them
and give the price to the poor.
2. My own case illustrates that we cannot do
this as private persons.
a. I am an old man paying enough in income
tax and surtax to provide doles for hun-
dreds of [unemployed and old age pen-
sioners.]
(l) I have not the slightest objection
to this.
(2) On the contrary, I advocated it
strongly for years before I had
any income worth taxing.
b. I could not do this if the government
did not arrange it for me.
(l)
(2)
(3)
225
I could send my war bonds to the
Chancellor of the Exchequer and
invite him to cancel the part of the
National Debt they represent.
(a) He would undoubtedly thank me
[in the most courteous official
terms] for my patriotism.
(b) The poor would not get any of it.
(c) The other payers of surtax
and income tax and death duties
would save by it.
I could burn all my Share certifi-
cates and inform the secretaries of
the companies that they might write
off that much of their capital indebt-
'edness.
(a) This would result in a bigger
dividend for the rest of the
stockholders.
‘(b) The poor would be out in the:]
cold as before.
I could sell my war bonds [and share
certificates] for cash and throw my
money out into the street to be
scrambled for.
(a) It would be snatched up, not
by the poorest, but by the best
fed [and most able-bodied] of
the scramblers.
(b) Anyway, such a course of
action would be impossible to
carry out.
i. Christ's advice to give to
the poor was not addressed
to me alone but to all who
have great possessions.
ii. Then there would be a mar-
ket of all sellers and no
buyers.
226
c. Therefore, my spare money is invested
where I can get the highest interest
and the best security.
(1) Then I can make sure it goes where
it is most wanted and gives employ-
ment.
(2) Any other way of dealing with my
spare money would be foolish and
demoralizing.
(3) But the result is that I become
.richer and richer and the poor be-
come relatively poorer and poorer.
ye
Our dilemma is that Almen in the lump] cannot govern
ourselves, but we need to be governed.
A. Giving the necessary power to an absolute monarch
or dictator causes him to go more or less mad
unless he is a quite extraordinary and therefore
seldom obtainable person.
B. A committee or parliament of superior persons can
be resorted to.
1. This might be necessary because modern
government is too big for a one-man job.
2. They will set up an oligarchy and abuse
their power for their own benefit.
C. Setting up a system of control of governors is
not a satisfactory solution.
1. The best governors will not accept any con-
trol except that Of their own conscience.
2. We Who are governed are also apt to abuse
any power of control we have.
a. Our ignorance, our passions, [our private
and immediate interests] are constantly in
conflict with the knowledge, the wisdom,
and the public Spirit and regard for the
future of our best qualified governors.
VI.
227
We cannot solve the problem of controlling governors
by choosing and changing our governors if they do not
suit.
A. Many government functions are in the hands not Of
elected officials but of a permanent staff.
1. Let me give you an imaginary example of
democratic choice which actually results
in paid civil servants.
a. We have to elect someone as postmaster
of a Village.
b. One stands out conspicuously from
among several candidates.
(1) He has frequently treated us at
the public house.
(2) He has subscribed a Shilling to
our flower Show.
(3) He has a kind word for the children
when he passes.
(4) He is a victim of Oppression by the
squire because his late father was
one of our most successful poachers.
c. We elect him triumphantly.
d. He is duly installed, provided with a
red bicycle, and given a batch of letters
to deliver.
e. He cannot fulfill his duties.
(1) His motive in seeking the post
was pure ambition.
(2) He cannot read.
f. He then hires a boy to fulfill his
responsibilities.
(1) The boy does the reading and con-
ceals himself in the lane whilst
the postman delivers the letters
2.
3.
228
at the house.
(2) The man gets the whole credit for
the transaction.
9. After the postmaster dies, the process
is repeated.
(1) Equally illiterate successors are
elected [on Similar grounds.]
(2) The boy grows up and becomes an
institution.
(a) He presents himself to the new
postman as an [established and]
indispensable feature of the
postal system, and finally be-
comes recognized and paid by
the village.
You have a picture of our national government
a. It may work very well.
(1) The postman, though illiterate, may
be a very capable fellow.
(2) The boy who reads addresses may be
quite incapable of doing anything
more.
b. On the other hand it may not work out well.
(1) The boy [, when he has ability to
take advantage of the situation,]
is really the master of the man.
(2) The elected official is merely doing
what a permanent Official tells him
to do.
A comparable situation exists in our national
government, where we are governed by a Civil
Service.
a. They have enormous power.
229
(1) Its regulations are taking the
place Of the laws of England.
(2) Some of its regulations are made
for the convenience of the officials
without the slightest regard to the
[convenience or even] the rights of
the peOple.
b. We have little choice in the selection of
them.
(1) They are selected mostly by an
educational test which nobody but
an expensively schooled youth can
pass.
Ra) Thus the system makes the
most powerful and effective
part of our government an
irresponsible class government.
)—
B. Furthermore, an example will Show that our votes
give us little control in democratic government.
1. When the election approaches, two or three
persons of whom I know nothing write to me
soliciting my vote.
a. I have no guarantee that the political
addresses which are enclosed are written
by the candidates or are an indication of
their beliefs and character.
(1) One reads like an article in the
Morninngost, has a Union Jack on
it [, and may have been compiled
from editorial waste baskets of a
hundred years ago.]
(2) Another is like the Daily News or
Manchester Guardian [and indicates
a similar use of old discarded ideas.]
(3) A third address, more up-to-date
and much better phrased, convinces
me that the sender has had it writ-
ten for him at the headquarters of
the Labour Party.
230
(4) A fourth [, the most hopelessly out
of date Of them all,] contains
scraps of the early English trans-
lations of the Communist Manifesto
of 1848.
b. The half-tone photographic portraits do
not even tell me their ages, having been
taken twenty years ago.
Attending a meeting at which a candidate is
speaking does not extend either my knowledge
or my control.
a. The meeting is held at a schoolroom which
is packed with peOple who find an elec-
tion meeting cheaper and funnier than
the theatre.
b. Faithful party workers are in charge.
(1) They ought to be the candidates; but
they have no more chance of such
eminence than they have of possess-
ing a Rolls-Royce car.
(2) They move votes of confidence in
the candidate.
(a) The candidate is really a
stranger to them and to every-
one else, and no one feels much
confidence.
[(3) They lead the applause for him.]
(4) They prompt him when questions are
asked.
(5) When he is completely floored, they
jump up and cry '1et me answer that,
Mr. Chairman!‘ [and then they pre-
tend that he has answered it.]
c. Old Shibboleths are croned over.
vitality
d. Nothing has any [ Asense or reality]
in it except the vituperation of the Op-
231
posing party, which is nothing but an
exhibition of bad manners.
I cannot see that this constitutes Democracy,
a control.
a. If this is Democracy, who can blame
Signor Mussolini for describing it as
a Putrefying corpse?
VII. What I would like to see is a system whereby we could
determine and select the best qualified candidates.
A.
First we Should need a real test Of their
capacity.
1.
Shortly before the war a doctor in San
Francisco discovered that if a drOp of
a candidate's blood can be obtained on
a piece of blotting paper, it is possible
to discover within half an hour what is
wrong with him physically.
What I am waiting for is [the discovery
of a process by which on delivery of] a
drOp of his blood or a lock of his hair
we can ascertain What is right with him
mentally.
Then we could have a graded series [Of panels
of capable persons for all kinds of employment.]
We would be limited to select only from among
the qualified for the various levels.
1.
At the lower end of the scale there would
be a panel of persons qualified to take
part in a parish meeting.
At the higher end there would be a panel
of persons qualified to act as Foreign
Ministers, for example.
a. My choice of candidates might be more
restricted.
(1) At present not more than two per
cent
kthousand] Of the pOpulation would
232
be available for the highest panel.
(2) I do not desire liberty to choose
windbags and nincompOOps to repre-
sent me in parliament.
b. My power to choose between one qualified
candidate and another would give me [as
as wide as is possible in
much] control [as is either possible or
theypresent state of affairs.
desirable.]
D. The voting and counting should be done by machinery.
1. I should connect my telephone with the
prOper office.
2. I should touch a button.
3. The machinery would do the rest.
VIII. We must do the best we can under our present system
[but several reforms are possible without any new
discovery.]
A. Our present parliament is obsolete [: it can no
more do the work of a modern state than Julius
Caesar's galley could do the work of an Atlantic
liner.]
1. We need two or three centrallparliaments and
several regional ones to correlate the work
and maintain contact.
1. We need two or three additional federal
legislatures, working on our municipal
committee system instead of our parlia-
mentary party system.
2. We need a central authority to co-ordinate
the federal work.
B. Our Obsolete little internal frontiers must be obliter-
ated, and our units of local government enlarged to
dimensions compatible with the recent prodigious ad-
vances in facility of communication and co-Operation.
233
C. Commonwealth affairs and supernational activities
through the League of Nations or otherwise will
have to be provided for, and Cabinet function to
be transformed.
D. All the pseudo-democratic Obstructive function
of our political machinery must be ruthlessly
scrapped, and the general problem of government
approached from a positive viewPoint at which
mere anarchic national sovereignty as dis-
tinguished from self-government will have no
meaning.
Conclusion
A.
LE.
. But no eystem will be of any use except in the final
resort we have good consciences and gpod public spirit
on theypart of both the_government and the voter.
1. We are prevented from being good citizens and
,governors by all sorts ofjpersona1_prejudices.
2. We have been badly brought up as citizens.
We must set to work to bring up our children to be
better citizens than we are.
1. Russia is doing_it.
That is my last word; prango home and think of it.
Even with these reforms, civilization will still be
dependent on the consciences of the governors and the
governed.
We must teach our children to be better citizens
than ourselves.
1. We are full of anti-social personal ambitions
and prejudices and snobberies.
a. Our natural dispositions may be good.
b. We have been badly brought up.
2. The Russians are doing this.
That is my last word; think over it.
234
Disposition
As the substance outline indicates, the textual vari-
ations Of Shaw's Speech do not materially affect the arrange-
ment of major issues: only a few stylistic discrepancies
exist in these assertions. Furthermore, the outline shows
basically a conventional problem-solution arrangement of
material.
An examination of the arrangement of the Speech in
detail Shows that Shaw's first remarks include the material
usually incorporated into an introduction: statement of
subject, statement of importance of subject, and statement
of the speech purpose. The speech purpose, according to
Shaw, has three parts, which he presents in the following
order: (1) to examine democracy in order to understand it,
(2) to provide against its dangers as far as possible, and
(3) to consider whether the risks of democracy are worth
taking. Whereas the first two purposes are develOped ex-
plicitly by prOpositionS in the problem-solution arrange-
ment of the Speech, the third, is merely suggested by the
content and does not appear in direct statements in the sub-
stance outline Of the body Of the speech.
At the end of his introduction, Shaw defines the key
term, "democracy," in three ways: etymologically; by com-
parison with a familiar process; and by develOpment of an
historical definition--Lincoln's statement of "government of,
235
by, and for the people." Shaw alters the order Of the
Lincoln quotation and develOps "by the peOple" last and thus
introduces his first statement of the problem: democracy
as government "by the peOple" is impossible.
Although the earlier definitions also introduce
aspects of the problem stated in the speech purpose, the
position â€that democracy hy the peOple" is impossible serves
as a foundation for the major assertions which Shaw makes
in describing the problems of the democratic process. The
first major assertion following the definition is that it
is necessary for peOple to protect themselves against the
misgovernment which could easily occur in a democracy. The
next two prOpositions which set the stage for complicating
the problem, are then presented: modern government is
extremely complex and carries out a number of functions,
including many of a socialistic nature; and functions of
government cohtinue to increase, adding to the burdens
faced in the democratic process. The next major asser-
tion is primarily a restatement of the problem as compli-
cated by modern developments: modern civilization requires
a complex system of government, but control Of governors
is extremely difficult.
The next major assertion serves two functions:
additional description of the problems existing, and a
236
negation of a possible solution for controlling those
selected to govern. This issue, concerned with the limited
effectiveness of choosing and changing elected officials,
first deals with Shaw's interpretation of the lack of any
real change in government policy by changing elected Offi-
cials and then with his point of view regarding the lack of
real choice in electing candidates for office.1 In the
process of refuting ways of solving the problem he attempts
to re-establish an assertion made in the definition portion
of his Speech: government by the pepple is an illusion.
Then Shaw concentrates on his stated solutions to
the problem, first presenting an idealistic solution, and
then presenting a solution possible under the present situ-
ation. Although this last major assertion dealing with
solutions to the problem varies in the two texts as far as
thoroughness of development is concerned, its position in
the basic arrangement of the Speech as a whole remains the
same.
~Finally, while he has no summary, Shaw concludes
with a brief peroration emphasizing individual respon-
sibilities and also with an extremely short statement that
his Speech is finiShed.
1The absence of a clear-cut division of this phase
of the problem is dealt with under "Invention."
237
In summary, we note that Shaw follows this basic
pattern in this speech on democracy: an extensive intro-
duction, Which also contains the stated Speech purpose;
definitions of the principal term, "democracy," which also
serves to present part of the problem on which the speech
focuses, extensive develOpment of various facets of the
problem, attempted refutation of possible solutions which
also endeavors to re-establish a phase of the problem in-
troduced earlier in the Speech, limited solutions, and a
brief conclusion.
Invention
Although a typical discussion of Invention as
demonstrated in a particular speech is often organized in
terms of kinds of proof, a somewhat different pattern will
be used in this analysis. Since Shaw's uses of logical,
ethical, and sensory proof are often closely related, an
organization showing Shaw's develOpment Of ideas in each of
the portions of the speech described in the previous sec-
tion will be used. With the work sheets found in the
Appendix as a basis, Shaw's use of logical proof, authority
of self and of others, and sensory materials will be dis-
cussed as they apply to (l) the introduction, (2) the defini-
tion of the key term "democracy," (3) the description of the
problem, (4) the refutation Of possible solutions and re-
238
establishment of the problem, (5) the solutions to the
problem, and (6) the conclusion. Unless otherwise stated,
the Times text is used as the basis for analysis.
The introduction
Shaw, probably well-known to his audience as a
humorous commentator and avowed Socialist, begins his speech
with a formal salutation to his audience and a brief state-
ment of his subject. Further, although he begins using the
first person singular immediately, his change to the first
person plural seems to serve the purpose of negating his
personal point of view and of stressing the importance of
the subject to all. In the remainder of the introduction,
however, he uses "I" and "you," relying on personal authority
in a series of assertions that need little support in des-
cribing the sea.
The use of sensory appeals is increased after an
indication that a comparison will be made between democracy
and the sea. In making this comparison, Shaw seemingly
focuses attention on the eee_rather than upon a word to
which his audience was likely to have highly emotional re-
actions. Further, the analogy gives Shaw the Opportunity
to attempt to capture, by means Often recognized by speech
theorists, the attention of the audience: through the humor
of comparing a neutral force with a process devised by human
239
beings; through the use of extremely familiar and highly
colorful phrases to describe the sea; and through humor by
concluding, offering Sign reasoning as evidence, that pointing
to the dangers inherent in the sea Should not lead to ob-
viously absurd prOposals for retaliation against the perils
found in nature. He further attempts to maintain audience
good-will by a direct plea for good sense, and in the process
appears to compliment his listeners by intimating that rea-
sonableness in viewing the sea can carry over into an evalu-
ation of democracy. He makes further use of ethical appeals
in describing himself in such apparently erroneous state-
ments as a "paid agent of Mussolini" in the process of ask-
ing the audience to listen to him rather than ascribe such
epithets to him. It is only at this point that he states
the purpose of his speech, couching what might be a direct
appeal for possible rejection of democracy in a request for
understanding and for conclusions drawn by individual listen-
ers, not by the Speaker.
The definition of the key term, "democracy"
Although Shaw's arrangement of material in which he
has definitions following the introduction is conventional,
his develOpment of the definitions is not. Further, even
though the first definition is basically etymological, he
does not indicate to the audience that he is concerning
240
himself with that method of definition. Rather, he refers
immediately to the Greek stem, personifies it, and putsâ€
himself into a hypothetical situation carrying on a dia-
logue with "Demos." Logical proof is limited to a series
of assertions; authority of self is heavily relied upon;
and extensive use of sensory appeals, including trite and
emotional phrases as well as the vivid dialogue format, is
the noteworthy feature of the first definition, which Shaw's
statements seem to negate as satisfactory to him.
In the second definition of democracy, Shaw again
makes use of analogy and relies on his own authority rather
than upon evidence beyond the comparison for proof. In
additiOn, sensory appeals are stressed: epithets and high-
ly colorful statements revealing the problems of the parlia-
mentary system, problems which are familiar to the audience.
In this situation the audience is asked to make the direct
comparison of the balloon with the election procedure;
Shaw merely gives the description which includes such state-
ments as "hardly room for Six hundred in the basket" and
"the balloon goes up again with much the same lot as before."
Although this definition, too, allows him to inject his
interpretation of problems in a democracy, his conclusion
is someWhat different from that in the first definition:
the comparison with a balloon, he believes, is much more
accurate.
241
The third definition which Shaw presents is based
on a familiar quotation, although he changes the order of
Lincoln's statement to: of the people, for the peOple, and
by the people. While he disgresses in giving the circum-
stances of Lincoln's Speech, he uses this Opportunity to
endeavor to make a point about illusions under which peOple
Operate when they use catch phrases such as "make the world
safe for democracy." Then, as he returns to the quotation
from Lincoln, the reason for the change in order emerges.
Shaw expresses his agreement with the first phrase and does
not develOp the issue beyond the assertion and a very brief
analogy. Although he also agrees with the second phrase, he
uses an enthymeme to put an unusual interpretation upon it.
TO this interpretation he adds authority of another, presum-
ably to strenthen belief. The choice of Dean Inge as this
authority not only gives Shaw the Opportunity for a reference
to a recent occasion but also for associating himself with an
exponent of Christian principles, thus adding another type
of sensory appeal, that of attempting to associate his
cause with that of commonly held charitable ideals. By first
pointing out areas Of agreement, he uses a familiar persu-
asive technique in an endeavor to minimize audience Opposi-
tion to his denial of the last phrase, "by the peOple."
After asserting "that government by the people is impossible,"
242
Shaw relies on comparisons, both brief, for support. The
first, based on familiar experience of children's hOpes,
relies on sensory appeals; While the second, based on Shavian
experiences as a p1aywright--fami1iar to the audience, relies
primarily on ethical proof. Thus, Shaw depends on the cul-
minating effect of the three definitions in his attempts
not only to clarify the term democracy as he uses it but
also to try to gain acceptance of his first issue: govern-
ment by the peOple as such is impossible. He has set the
stage, so to Speak, for presenting the problems of govern-
ing people by democratic means.
The description of theyproblem
Although the initial statement of the problem not
only is based on acceptance of the assertion regarding the
impossibility of direct government but also is qualified to
the effect that he is referring to most, not all, rulers,
Shaw's first major prOpOSition dealing directly with the
problem is "that control of those governing is necessary."
He attempts to prove this assertion by contending that past
methods are impractical. This impracticality, as he sees it,
is dealt with in two phases, both relying heavily on extended
illustrations and Short examples for support. In develOping
the first portion Of the argument, Shaw relies on an ex-
tensive illustration, undoubtedly hypothetical, of his own
243
experiences which led him to conclude that pOpular move-
ments are unreliable. Although the story of the runaway
cow is an old one, Shaw puts it on a personal level, and
in addition uses it to illustrate a recent British political
Situation, the Zinoviev letters. While Shaw turns to ex-
amples from history for the second argument in endeavoring
to Show the questionable effect of direct control, he again
uses authority of self extensively, for the audience must
rely on the accuracy of Shaw's own statements for the
reliability of this proof.
In all, Shaw uses three historical examples in his
attempt to prove the inefficacy of popular movements to
exert control over rulers. Although he uses the all-
inclusive "we" in pointing to historical examples, he moves
from the most familiar to the least familiar in describing
these examples, which seems to indicate an awareness of and
adjustment to the probable background knowledge of the audi-
ence. Furthermore, his use of words which appear calcu-
lated to evoke emotional responses increases with each ex-
ample, until in the restatement his assertion is highly
colored by such words. At this point, also, he summarizes
and injects a direct barb at the attitudes of individuals
making up his audience. While tempering this fault-finding
by including himself in the remark and by a humorous refer-
244
ence, he nevertheless points out the error of believing that
control Of government is to be dealt with lightly.
Even though the next issue raised by Sha -- "that
government has become more complex" --may appear to be a
digression, it helps set the stage for a subsequent portion
of the speech. Supporting his point by a series of un-
develOped and familiar examples and by statements of past
events relying upon his own observation, Shaw asserts that
increasing government action is necessary. Even though
relying heavily upon the acceptance of his personal testi-
mony in Showing the growth of government action in private
industry, he does not neglect the added weight of sensory
material in describing past action and uses such terms as
â€bitter SXperience," "ghastly waste of human life,“ and
"appalling slaughter" to emphasize the need for govern-
ment's assuming responsibilities heretofore the function
of private industry. He further supports his contention
and extends its implications Of pOpular approval by point-
ing to the results of a recent election. Though the causes
for the election results may have been complex, Shaw uses
the event, familiar to his audience, to substantiate his
assertion.
The next assertion then unites the two previously
made ones as he develops the point that the increasing com-
245
plexity of modern life adds to the problems faced in a demo-
cratic system. After pointing out again "the need for gov-
erning bodies" by relying for proof on brief statements
serving as examples, Shaw then concerns himself with showing
the effects of government action on individuals. Although
using unspecified testimony for initial support in showing
the need for government action, he emphasizes other methods
of support as he develops the point that government assis-
tance is needed for fulfillment of religious needs. While
in this contention he uses the inclusive term, "religious
needs," it soon becomes apparent that he is speaking of
only one aspect of religion, that of "charity."
In the develOpment of this assertion, reliance is
placed on two basic logical proofs: testimony by Dean Inge
and an extended illustration drawn from personal experience.
Although an illustration can be classified as logical proof,
other types of proof predominate in the actual development
of the illustration. First, of course, there is extensive
ethical proof as Shaw uses personal experiences, especially
an aspect of his life which is well-known to his audience:
that as a successful playwright he is an Old but wealthy
man and subject to heavy taxation. Further, in this speech
he does not object to the taxes he must pay but lauds the
action as a necessary one by government in modern society,
246
thus exhibiting further use of ethical proof which could
help project a favorable image and add weight to his posi-
tion. In addition, in the develOpment of the illustration
he uses many sensory words as he describes extreme actions
he might take in redistributing his money among the poor.
He uses unusual cases and the method of residues in leading
his audience to believe that charity is possible only
through government action.
Shaw then abruptly leaves this aspect of his speech,
using only a brief transitional statement, "Now let us get
down to our problem," and repeats, in different terms, an
assertion he made earlier: "men cannot govern themselves
but need to be governed." He makes use of causal reasoning
in what appears to be an attempt to re-establish his point,
but he does not go beyond the generalization level in sup-
porting his assertion. As is true throughout the speech,
he relies on the word "we" to include his audience in his
point of View; but he uses only a limited number of sensory
words in this portion of the Speech.
The refutation of possible solutions
and re-establishment of the problem
The next assertion, introduced with a rhetorical
question, seems best described as an attempt to refute a
possible solution while trying, at the same time, to re-
247
establish the problem as he states: "the problem of control
of governors cannot be solved through the election process."
The assertion, developed in considerable detail, is divided
into two parts: the limited value Of elected officials,
and the limited choice available in any election.
After the rhetorical question mentioned above there
is immediate movement into an illustration of the elected
postmaster who cannot read, which is presented in support
of the idea of the limited value of elected officials with-
out stating that assertion. Although his side comment on
the reason for selecting an imaginary example seems super-
fluous, it may be interpreted as an attempt to conciliate
an audience which might object to statements that could
reflect adversely upon the democratic process. Use of the
narrative could fulfill two functions often ascribed to
this technique: that of helping develop audience goodwill
and achieving increased audience attention. Although he
uses logical develOpment in the hypothetical illustration,
with need, solution, evidence, and causal relationships
carefully set up, the fact remains that he is relying on
a single illustration for his proof.
Nor does Shaw depend on the logical aspects of his
supporting material to promote acceptance of his contention:
the illustration is full of familiar references to actions
248
of potential candidates and of descriptive details to make
the visualization of the situation vivid to the audience.
The interest Shaw attempts to generate in the illustration
might result in the audience's paying more attention to it
than to his simplification of the situation. Only after
the completion of the illustration is a direct comparison
made with the Civil Service, using the narrative as proof
of the ineffectiveness of changing elected officials.
While again using causal and sign reasoning in applying the
illustration, Shaw nevertheless depends on the analogy for
gaining acceptance of the assertions made.
Although Shaw is careful, for the most part, in
building one argument upon the other, the inclusion at this
point of his next sub-assertion, that control of governors
through election is impossible, appears questionable. While
now the concern is with the limited value of the vote in
electing officials because we know so little of their
abilities, the point seems anti-climactic since he has
already attempted to show that a change in elected officials
is meaningless because of the power of appointed officials.
Nevertheless, Shaw now deals with the limited value of the
vote, even though acceptance of the previous point would
make this issue superfluous. Furthermore, the relationship
of these two points is not made clearer in the Preface
249
version of the speech: the transition, "Now what control
have you or I over the Services? We have votes," comes
after his assertion that changing elected officials has
no effect on changing Civil Service personnel.
Since examining the internal evidence (as Opposed
to a direct answer from Shaw) does not reveal whether the
seeming inapproPriateness of this issue under discussion
was the result of oversight on Shaw's part or a purposeful
attempt to strengthen his argument on the limited value of
the franchise, the develOpment of his assertion should be
considered. Again we note heavy reliance upon the accept-
ance of Shaw as an authority in relating a situation to
the audience. Although the sequence of events described
is hypothetical, his inclusion of specific refers to news-
papers, for example, adds reality to the situation. Fur-
thermore, the illustration, which is developed in a logi-
cal pattern primarily using sign and causal reasoning,
consists of personal observations. Also, as is true in so
many other instances, Shaw relies heavily on vivid langu-
age, narration, dialogue, and familiar instances to main-
tain interest and achieve agreement. He selects incidents
for his narration which could be true, and from these some—
What limited events generalizes that voting does not con—
stitute control of the government. It is only at this
250
point that Shaw makes what could be interpreted as an open
condemnation of democracy in its entirety by asking whether
Mussolini can be blamed for calling it a "putrefying corpse,"
although even at this point he does not explicitly state
his agreement with that point of view.
The solutions to the problem
With the problem thus set forth and common controls
repudiated, Shaw now turns to possible solutions. The
first, introduced by means of an analogy, is presented as
being in the realm of "wishful thinking." While carefully
setting forth the advantages of a means by Which capabilities
for political office can be determined, he does not indicate
that such a procedure is imminent. This possible solution
contains material which seems designed to carry high audi-
ence interest but due to its idealistic nature does not aid
in the solution of the problem.
The next solution presented in the Times text is
limited to a generalization relying upon ethical proof and
offering no details. The Preface version adds details,
still on an assertion level, but does not deal with the
implementation of any specific plan. Although the Preface
text contains some words of high emotional content, this
section of the speech does not use sensory proof as exten-
sively as do other portions of the speech already described.
251
The conclusion
The conclusion of Shaw's speech is relatively brief.
Not summarizing, he relies on a final exhortation to the
audience. While the two texts appear to differ greatly in
that interpolative methods of insertion and deletion can be
used only with great difficulty, closer analysis shows they
are much alike in content. Even though Shaw continued to
use authority of self for acceptance of his view, he adds
a point apparently designed to conciliate his audience by
following his advice that we must become better citizens
with the statement: "we are not to blame, for we have
been badly brought up." Then, as he exhorts the audience
"to bring up our children to be better citizens than we
are," he adds as supporting material his first and only
reference to the superiority of Communist Russia, which he
presents as evidence to show the possibility for improve-
ment. He develops the statement no further, and closes
abruptly with, "That is my last word," and a caution to
think about his remarks.
Summary_of_Invention
A brief summary of the analysis of Shaw's practice
in the area of Invention discloses the following conclu-
sions regarding logical proof, ethical proof or authority
of self, and sensory proof:
252
As we summarize the logical proof used in this
speech, we note heavy reliance on analogy and illustration
in this aspect of invention, and extensive use of causal and
sign reasoning in develOping them. Furthermore, although
Shaw also occasionally uses testimony of others, there is
a notable absence of evidence of other kinds in supporting
his assertions. Even though there is dependences on other
types of proof for acceptance of his contentions, the as-
sertions are developed with careful attention paid to the
patterning of causal and sign reasoning. Also, Shaw fre-
quently uses the inductive pattern of assertion-evidence
when presenting the material summarized above.
Shaw depends upon ethical proof to a great extent
in the develOpment of analogies and illustrations. He shows
no hesitancy in using the first person singular throughout
the speech, and his own observations of the implications
of such incidents are offered as proof in a number of in-
stances. Although he occasionally refers to his audience
as "you," this appears to be done only when he attempts to
establish himself as having the same points of view as the
audience (as in the introduction); and he much more fre-
quently aligns himself with the audience through an exten-
sive use of "we."
The kind of proof Shaw uses to the greatest extent,
however, is that classified here as sensory materials.
253
Although analogies and illustrations can correctly be
described as part of logical proof, the use made of them
must also be included here, partly because of his reliance
upon a single case for each assertion and more because of
the manner in which he develOps them. With great frequency
he uses narration, vivid language, unusual comparisons, and
humor stemming from the unexpected choice of illustration
and description. The illustrations used, whether hypo-
thetical or historical, are based on possible situations,
which may have an effect of adding to the credibility of
the arguments. Through the use of all of these sensory
materials, audience attention seems to be focused on the
single case. Shaw appears to depend upon this acceptance
as the path for agreement with his major assertions.
This apparent dependence upon the acceptance of
single cases may have some relationship to the comparative
shortness of the solution and the conclusion, particularly
if we keep in mind that although Shaw's stated purpose is
to persuade the audience to understand democracy and to
consider whether its risks, as Shaw sees them, are worth
taking, his unstated purpose seems to be to persuade the
audience to reject democratic practices. His concentra-
tion of proof, especially sensory, upon the presentation
of the problem stresses that unstated purpose, and the
254
audience may thus tend to remember that aspect of the speech.
Furthermore, since a summary often tends to focus attention
on the assertions rather than upon the illustrations which
are more likely to enhance the unstated purpose, the brief
conclusion may have been a factor in his persuasive design.
In all, Shaw's use of Invention in this speech ap-
pears to indicate careful consideration of his speech pur-
pose and probable audience reactions.
Style
One of the most elusive and difficult concepts in
rhetorical criticism is that of Style: if given too limited
a definition, the resulting analysis of that aspect of
speaking is a sterile and inadequate description of the
unique aspects of a speaker's use of language; if given
too broad a definition, the analysis encompasses the total—
ity of the thought processes of the speaker. Furthermore,
a thorough examination of Style necessitates an authentic
speech manuscript if such a study is to be complete. Thus,
a dual problem exists in the analysis of the Style of
Bernard Shaw in this speech under discussion.
Although the many discrepancies in word choice and
sentence structure in the two speech manuscripts, as pointed
out earlier in this study, make it necessary to limit and
qualify stylistic judgments, certain tendencies in Shaw's
255
use of language should be noted. First, general tendencies
in sentence structure will be pointed out, followed by
similar remarks concerning the use of words. Finally, an
attempt will be made to describe what appears to be a unique
factor of the style.
While the caution against final judgment because
of textual discrepancies is particularly applicable to
sentence structure, one or two general observations of
tendencies can be made. First, although Shaw uses a number
of complex sentences, they are not as numerous in the Times
text as in the Preface text. Furthermore, many of these
complex sentences in the Times text tend to be introduced
by adverbial clauses. Compound and simple sentences,
occasionally very short ones, appear more frequently. In
general, the sentences tend to be short, and undue complexity
is avoided.
Another aspect of Style which appears in Shaw's
apeech and which seems to merit attention is the use of
antithesis and repeated phrases in the construction of his
sentences. In the introduction, for example, two sets of
such phrases appear: "some of us" followed by "others,"
and "if I say" combined with "you will not." Although the
terms vary slightly in phraseology and have a greater amount
of intervening material, a similar pattern is discernible
256
in that portion of the speech where Shaw speaks of ways of
distributing money using the words, "I could" and "but it
would." Occasionally the repetition occurs without the
antithesis, such as in the use of "it may be" when des-
cribing corporate bodies which exert control over indivi—
duals.
Some observations regarding Style are concerned
with both sentence structure and word choice. For example,
although transitions and similar guides to the listener in
this speech are occasionally full sentences such as, "Now
let us get down to our problem," more often a single word
or a phrase is used, such as "well," "now," "but," "so,"
and "now let us." As we note other guides for the listener,
we discover that even though two instances of specific
enumeration appear in the speech, there are several other
series which are not enumerated but seem to be stressed
as being part of a series by words such as "another," con-
junctions, or perhaps delivery.
Turning to further word choices, we note the fairly fre-
quent use of the terms "I" and "we." Although this charac-
teristic is discussed in the section dealing with Invention,
ï¬wâ€”â€œï¬ ï¬r
1This final point is obviously tenuous and is based
solely on recordings of other speeches and upon the impli-
cations of punctuation marks used in both texts.
257
it is mentioned here since such observations are often in-
corporated into stylistic evaluations but will not be develOped
in detail. Similarly, the use of personal experiences is
discussed in the previous section.
Thus far, though certain tendencies in sentence
structure and use of language have been noted, nothing
which is stylistically unique to Shaw has been revealed.
Further, when we look at individual words which are used,
we find that they are, for the most part, relatively common;
few appear to be beyond the comprehension of an "average"
listener. In addition, we find that some words and phrases
verge upon the trite: "three rousing cheers," "windbag,"
"pick to pieces," "repair the ravages of war," "hue and cry."
Since individuality does not seem to stem from these factors,
one further observation regarding the style must be discussed
which is neither simply structural or merely a matter of
single word choice: the observation that the distinctive-
ness of the style stems from the unusual placement or juxta—
positioning of otherwise common words and ideas. Although
this element is closely related to Invention--if, indeed,
it can be separated from it--, this seems to be a Shavian
characteristic which can be called part of Style.
As examples, let us first take three phrases: "never
accept anything reverently;" "abolish the sea;" and "ordi—
258
nary professional fiddler." None of the foregoing words
taken individually is unusual or distinctive. On the other
hand, we are not likely to associate the adverb "reverently"
with the verb "accept," nor use the verb "abolish" in con-
nection with the "sea," nor dignify "professional" with
"fiddler." This same characteristic of the unexpected
choice appears in such associations as "runaway cow" with
"political philos0phy," in brief comparisons such as "gov-
ernment of the people" with "every boy . . . an engine
driver or a pirate king;" and in extended analogies such
as "the sea" and "democracy." Furthermore, the use of the
ordinary or trite phrases mentioned earlier not only tends
to highlight the extraordinary ones but also takes on the
aura of unexpectedness in that they are so common and are
interspersed with those which tend to strike us as unusual.
Moreover, this tendency which is a part of Style (and/or
Invention) also seems to play a part in that complex
phenomenon of humor found in Shavian discourse.
In summary, then, it is difficult to make extensive
conclusive judgments regarding certain aspects of Shaw's
Style because of the nature of the discrepancies in the
collated text. A few general tendencies in sentence struc-
ture, however, can be noted: a number of simple and com-
pound sentences; complex sentences beginning with adverbial
259
clauses; and aluse of antithesis and repetition. In general,
also, transitions tend to be single words or very brief
phrases. Although the use of "I" and references to per-
sonal experiences are also stylistic features, they are dis-
cussed in detail as matters of Invention. Finally, the dis-
tinctive feature of Shaw's Style is not due to single words,
which have few noteworthy characteristics, but to his ten—
dency to use fairly common words in unusual ways and to
make unexpected comparisons. Although this feature, which
also seems to account for the humor of Shaw, is presented
as an element of Style, its extremely close relationship to
Invention cannot be over-emphasized.
Response
While audience reaction to a speech is an important
facet of speech criticism, almost no evidence exists regard-
ing the reception accorded this speech. Polls for obtaining
radio audience reaction were virtually unknown in 1929, and
individual published reactions would reveal the response
of only a very minute segment of the probable audience.
Therefore, two other sets of factors must be used in noting
response: return invitations to broadcast, and acceptance
of prOposals made in the speech.
Although "return invitations to broadcast" appears
to be a questionable criterion, it should be kept in mind
260
that this was Shaw's first radio speech on a controversial
subject. The B. B. C., which had been given permission to
broadcast controversial subjects only the year before, pro-
ceeded cautiously under the new policy.1 While subsequent
appearances could conceivably have been denied, Shaw broad-
cast a number of times in succeeding years. Therefore, it
would seem that the authorities of B. B. C. apparently
believed that this speech met their standards of apprOpri-
2
ateness.
With respect to the standard concerned with the
acceptance of proposals made in the Speech, two sets of
factors should be considered: stated and implied purposes,
and immediate and long-range results. If we rely on Shaw's
stated purpose--"that we should understand democracy"--,
the answer is simple: we don't know whether that purpose
was achieved either immediately or on a long-range basis.
Since no action is implied, only a s0phisticated attitude
test would give results; and no such test was made.
On the other hand, a somewhat different answer is
possible regarding the unstated thesis, "We must reject
democracy," forcnnzt action reflecting such rejection would
be necessary as an indication of "success." Although Britain
1
See p. 74
2 . .
In 1940, however, the British Ministry of Infor-
mation "cancelled" a Shaw speech. See Shaw, Platform and
Pulpit, p. 286.
261
had its Mosleyites for a time in the mid-thirties, and
although Socialism has increased in Britain since World War
II, neither can be attributed to this speech nor are they
a fulfillment of the prOposals which Shaw put forth as
solutions to the problems of democracy. Thus, even though
the ending date of "long-range goals" is impossible to fix,
we must say that up to this point there seems little indi-
cation that Shaw achieved success in fulfilling his unstated
purpose.
Conclusions regarding audience response to this
speech of Shaw's, then, are extremely scanty. Although we
can recognize that he was allowed to continue broadcasting
on controversial subjects by B. B. C., few conclusive
statements are possible regarding the effectiveness of this
speech in achieving its purposes. Since little in the way
of immediate, specific action was called for, however,
long—range effect has to be examined; and at the present
time there appears little indication that this single
Speech of Shaw's resulted in any appreciable change in
either attitude or action.
1
This question regarding the effectiveness of persu-
asion remains unanswered for all of Shaw's speaking. See
the footnote, p. 95.
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY
Bernard Shaw, world-famous as a playwright, filled
his life with countless interests and activities. One
aspect of his life which is often overlooked, particularly
by scholars in the area of public address, is Shaw's exten-
sive and life—long appearances on the public platform and,
in later years, before the radio micrOphone. The purpose
of this study was to (1) note the biographical and histori-
cal background related to a study of him as a speaker, (2)
discover what theories of public speaking, if any, were
expressed by him, (3) investigate the sources and nature of
extant speech texts, and (4) analyze a speech in depth by
use of the case study method.
Shaw, a Protestant in Irish Catholic Dublin, was
born in 1856 to a family who lived in "genteel poverty."
After an unconventional childhood and youth marked by a
permissive home atmosphere, little formal schooling, and a
responsible position in a land agent's office, Shaw moved
to London at the age of nineteen. Although he was employed
briefly in his early years in that city, he concentrated
262
263
upon reading at the British Museum and writing five novels,
which met with little success. At the same time he under-
took minor writing projects; and after a number of years he
was able to earn his living by writing art, music, and
dramatic criticisms.
Shortly after his arrival in London, Shaw became
interested in the many societies which existed in the city
and in which debating was the order of the day. A depres-
sion and social problems which were rampant in late nine-
teenth century England furnished the subject-matter for the
deliberations of many of these groups. Although Shaw re-
solved early to become a Speaker and set about searching
for situations which would give him experience, he believed
that it was only after hearing Henry George Speak and be-
coming converted to Socialism that he had a "cause" which
gave the impetus to his develOpment as a speaker. For
years Shaw spoke at numerous debating societies, on street-
corners, at the docks, and wherever he could find an audience
willing to listen to him speak about Socialism.
The group with which Shaw's name is most closely
associated is, of course, the Fabian Society. While his
most famous contribution as a member of that group is
probably his part in the Fabian Essays and in helping to
make policy decisions as a member of the Executive Committee,
264
he was also active in both the lectures the Society pre-
sented at regular meetings and the speaking engagements the
Society arranged in London and surrounding areas to promote
Socialism.
In the last decade of the century he was in great
demand as a speaker and achieved a measure of fame in London
as a journalist and a lecturer. Near the end of the cen-
tury, however, he decided to curtail such activities and
concentrate on his playwriting. Although the first years
of the century mark his most productive years as a dramatist,
he did not completely forego his platform activities: and
during World War I his essay writing and his speaking again
took precedence over playwriting.
His fame grew steadily after the war years, and his
dramatic writing won him the Nobel Prize in 1925. Although
he was nearly seventy years of age his writing and Speaking
continued. He received much publicity, his penchant for
"quotable" remarks apparently encouraging newspapers to
devote a considerable amount of space to him, even though
his position on many issues irritated a great number of
readers. When he died at the age of ninetyafour after a
full and active life, his passing was mourned throughout the
world.
In his lifetime, Shaw delivered approximately 2000
265
speeches. Furthermore, an examination of his writing on the
subject of public speaking indicates that through experience
and perhaps early exposure to some rhetorical theory, he
evolved a fairly complete formulation of principles. Al-
though in this study, observations of those who heard Shaw
speak was utilized for illustrative purposes, Shavian theories
as presented here were derived from statements made by Shaw
in his critiques of other Speakers, in advice he gave
others, and in his reports of his own public speaking ex-
periences.
Statements found in such Shavian material were clas-
sified under: (1) general comments about public Speaking,
(2) preparation, (3) content, and (4) delivery.
In his general comments aboutgpublic speaking Shaw
pointed out the value of public speaking to an individual,
indicating that the experience can be helpful to a writer
or to one intending to enter public life in some way. Fur-
ther, investigation shows he looked upon public speaking as
performing an important function in a free society provided
that all sides eventually have an Opportunity to present
their points of view. In addition, Shaw believed that in
order for this function to be performed adequately, the
speaker should not neglect his responsibilities, particu-
larly in the matter of observing the formalities of public
266
meetings. Finally, although he made only a few remarks
about the persuasive effect of public Speaking, particu-
larly his own, his view was often pessimistic even if some-
what inconclusive.
Shaw dealt with a number of aspects of preparation
in the material examined. First, his comments indicate
that he viewed public speaking as a learned art in which
some degree of proficiency could be attained through prac-
tice. Although his remarks reveal his belief that practice
alone is not sufficient, it is only through examining addi-
tional statements made in other sources that the factors
influencing this view become apparent. For example, he
commented extensively on the role of audience analysis
(though he did not use that rhetorical term) and on the
need for a speaker's knowing his subject well. Furthermore,
he consistently advocated extemporaneous speeches. Although
he did not refer at any time to rehearsing the Speech be-
fore delivery, he commented frequently on the need for
speakers to practice articulation and voice production as
part of the preparation process.
Content of Speeches received a great deal of atten-
tion in Shaw's critiques of Speakers, advice to them, and
reports of his own experiences as a speaker. In particular,
his comments indicate that he believed consideration of the
267
audience is basic to the content of the speech. Although
references to the audience tend to permeate all phases of
his theories, he expressed the following about audience
analysis which has bearing upon content: (1) the speaker
must realize the nature of audiences in general; (2) the
speaker must realize the nature of specific audiences; and
(3) the speaker must not misinterpret immediate audience
reactions. The principal feature of Shaw's statement re-
garding the nature of contentions is the view that maxi-
mizing serves an important function in gaining attention
and, perhaps, in permitting a speaker to present a point
of view which the audience might otherwise find objection-
able. Shaw's theories regarding the develOpment of an
argument appear to be three-fold: (l) the speaker should
know the steps in reasoning by which his conclusions are
reached and should make them clear to the audience; (2)
the speaker should have an ample fund of factual material
to support his contentions: and (3) the speaker should use
illustrations, especially those which come from personal
experience, to amplify his assertions. Finally, Shaw's
comments in the area of content also include references
to refutation, which he seemed to regard as requiring a
special approach and point of view.
Perhaps Shaw's comments regarding delivery are most
268
familiar, partly because they also appear in his essays on
drama and partly because Shaw spoke of them so often.
Briefly, he advocated the extemporaneous method of delivery;
careful attention paid to natural and meaningful bodily action;
and particular emphasis given to adequate volume, articula-
tion of consonants, and absence of distracting provincial—
isms.
In all, though Shaw began his speaking at the time
when "elocutionists" were the vogue, his comments about
public speaking greatly resemble in many respects theories
of speech advocated by the majority of the teachers of
speech today.
Since one of the problems facing any study of Shaw
as a public speaker relates to the availability of texts,
this study represents an attempt to compile a list of all
known Speech sources. Although the number——just under 175
--falls far short of the total delivered by Shaw, the com-
pilation seems to add to our knowledge of Shaw as a public
speaker.
First, the description of speeches appears to sub-
stantiate observations of others that Shaw spoke to a wide
variety of audiences. Second, even though few speeches are
available from Shaw's early years as a Socialist, political
subjects dominate the list, with speeches pertaining to the
269
arts occurring with the next greatest frequency, followed
by religion, education, and medicine--as subjects selected
by Shaw. Third, the list of speeches suggests other studies
of Shaw which appear desirable and feasible: careful textual
analyses of speeches, particularly an attempt to determine
the nature of revisions which Shaw made When submitting a
speech for publication; after such textual studies, an in-
vestigation of the extent to which Shaw put into practice
his theories of public speaking; and detailed analysis of
possible changes in Shaw's speeches on Socialism as a re-
sult of possible differences in his audiences or adjust-
ments in his own point of view.
Although the biographical and historical background,
Shaw's theories of speech, and the listing of extant speech
texts aid in understanding Shaw as a Speaker, one further
approach seemed necessary to make this study complete: the
analysis of a speech in depth. The speech, "On Democracy,"
was selected for the case study. Delivered before a radio
audience in October, 1929, it represented Shaw's first ap-
pearance before a micr0phone in which he was permitted to
speak on a "controversial" subject. While little is known
of the specific make-up of that audience, there is ample
evidence regarding the factors effecting the "climate of
Opinion": Facism had gained a foothold in Italy and Com-
270
munism in Russia, economic conditions were precarious in
Britain, and the Labour Party had not distinguished itself
in the short time it had been in power.
Two texts, one from The New York Times and the other
from the Preface to The Apple Cart, were first collated.
While there are many discrepancies in the two texts, many
of the differences are relatively minor. Although the news-
paper text seems to approximate more closely the Speech as
delivered, its accuracy could not be established with final-
ity. Many of the differences in which probable accuracy
could not be determined were related to matters of Style,
necessitating care in the process of analysis.
The collated text, a substance outline, and work
Sheets formed the basis of the analysis. A study of
Disposition revealed that Shaw used the following basic
pattern: (1) an introduction, which also has a statement
of his Speech purpose; (2) definitions of the key term
"democracy"; (3) the develOpment of the problem; (4) the
refutation of possible solutions; (5) the presentation of
his recommendations; and (6) a conclusion. Furthermore,
the analysis shows that the recommendation and conclusion
portion of the speech are short compared with the other
divisions.
The analysis of Invention revealed the following:
271
a heavy reliance upon personal experiences and illustrations
for evidence often combined with reasoning from analogy; fre-
quent use of the frameworks of causal and sign reasoning
and the inductive pattern; extensive use of personal
authority for proof, with the use of "I" and "we" through-
out the speech; and very frequent use of that type of mate-
rial classified as sensory proof.
In addition to such matters of Style which are
closely related to Invention, such as use of the first
person and extensive use of illustrations, the following
characteristics were noted: in the area of sentence struc-
ture, a dominance of simple and compound sentences, with
complex sentences tending to be introduced with adverbial
clauses; use of antithesis and repetition; brief transi-
tions; use of comparatively common words and a few trite
phrases; and an unusual juxtapositioning of words and phrases
which seems to account for much of the Shavian humor.
Because little information, unfortunately, is
available on the audience reSponse to this speech, the
persuasive effect of this single speech cannot be measured
accurately with the information available.
The over-all conclusions regarding Shaw as a speaker
may be listed as follows: (1) Shaw, who achieved fame in
more than one sphere of activity, made an estimated 2000
272
speeches during a Speaking career that spanned nearly
three-quarters of a century; (2) while his theories of
public speaking, which deal with general comments about
speech, preparation, content, and delivery, present noth-
ing unusual or new, they appear in a number of sources,
deal with many aspects of public speaking, and are very
similar to theories held by many present day teachers of
speech; (3) although only about one-tenth of his delivered
speeches seem to be extant, they afford some basic infor-
mation concerning audiences and choice of subjects, and
appear to provide a basis for additional studies of him as
a speaker; and (4) the case study of a speech reveals a
fundamentally careful organization of material in a basic
problem-solution pattern with emphasis upon the problem;
the use of causal, Sign, and inductive reasoning pattern
with a dependence upon analogies, illustrations, authority
of self, and sensory materials for proof; and a style note-
worthy, in particular, for its juxtaposition of ideas not
commonly associated.
Bernard Shaw, whose many talents combine to make
him a complex and fascinating individual, merits recognition
in the area of public address as an able theorist and skill-
ful practitioner of public Speaking.
APPENDICES
273
APPENDIX
PART I
Text: "On Democracy"
Explanatory Note: The basic text used is from Bernard Shaw,
Preface to The Apple Cart (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1956),
pp. 14-28. Collation is from a stenographic report which
appeared in The New York Times, November 3, 1929, X, 3, 9.
Material appearing in the Preface text but not in the news-
paper text will be bracketed; material in the newspaper text
but not in the Preface will be placed on the line immediately
above and underlined, starting at the caret mark and occas-
sionally continuing to the next line. Punctuation changes
are not noted unless they are a part of the interpolated
material.
Your Majesties, your Royal Highnesses, your Excel—
lencies, your Graces and Reverences, my Lords, Ladies and
and
Gentlemen, Afellow-citizens [of all degrees] : I am going
, not from my point of viewL
to talk to you about Democracy Aobjectively: that is I, as
but
it exists and] as we must all reckon with it equally, no
274
275
Let me illustrate
matter what our points of view may be. [\Suppose I were to
what I mean bypthis.
talk to you not about Democracy, but about the sea, which is
in some respects [rather] like Democracy: We all have our
own views of the sea. Some of us hate it and are never well
- or in it
when [we are] at it or on it. Others love it, [and are
/\
never so happy as When they are in it or on it or looking at
it.] Some of us regard it as Britain's natural realm and
surest bulwark: others want a Channel Tunnel. But cer-
tain facts about the sea are quite independent of our feel-
say
ings toward it. If I [take it for granted] that the sea
/\
not
exists, [none of you] will contradict me. If I say that
it occasionally, L dangerous and
[the seal/\is [sometimes furiously] violent [and always
treacherous
uncertain, and that those who are most familiar with it
trust it least,] you will not {immediately} shriek out that
[I do not believe in the sea; that] I am an enemy of the sea;
that I want to abolish the sea; Ethat I am going to make
276
bathing illegal;] that I am out to ruin our carrying trade
steal the sea.
and.â€Jlay waste all our seaside resorts and scrap the
British Navy. If I tell you that you cannot breathe in the
sea,] you will not [take that as a personal insult and]
ask me indignantly if I consider you inferior to a fish.
relate
/\
Well, you must [please] be equally sensible When I
[tell you] some hard facts about Democracy. [When I tell
democragy is
you that it is] sometimes/«furiously violent [and always]
dangerous and treacherous, and that those who are familiar
. When I
with it as practical statesmen trust it least,/<you must
say this Signor
not at once denounce me as a paid agent of Benito
/\
nor think of me as
Mussolini,/\[or declare that I have become] a Tory Die-
hard in my old age, [and accuse me of wanting to take away
your votes and make an end of parliament, and the franchise,
and free Speech, and public meeting, and trial by jury.
nor pp_
Still less]/\must you riselhsn your places and give me
the
three rousing cheers as â€Sal champion of medieval monarchy
277
and feudalism. [I am quite innocent of any such extrava-
democratic
gances.] All I mean is that whether we are/AJDemocrats]
Tory whether we are communistic
or/\[Tories],/\[Catholics or Protestants,]/{Communists] or
Fascistic
‘AFascistsl , we are all face to face with a certain force
in the world called Democracy; and we must understand the
nature of that force [whether we want to fight it or to
presence
forward it]. Our business is not to deny the/\[perils] of
its dangers
Democracy, but to provide against/Agthem] as far as we can,
aregproviding_
and then consider whether the risks we/Njcannot provide]
against are worth taking.
As Mr. Lowes Dickinson introduced democragy at the
deemocracy, as you know it, is seldom] more than a
first of these broadcast talks it was no he knew most
long word beginning with a capital letter, which/\[we] accept
of us would
reverently [or disParage contemptuously] without asking [any]
But
/\[Now] we should never accept anything rever-
without askipg
ently [until we have asked it] a great many [very searching]
/\
questions.
offall,"Who
questions, [the] first/Atho being What] are you? and
secondly, .1:
Where do you live? AIWhen] I put these questions to
/\
278
EEElX.
Democracy the /Qanswer I get] is 'My name is Demos; and I
live in the British Empire, the United States of America,
and wherever the love of liberty burns in the heart of man.
You, my friend Shaw, are a unit of Democracy: your name is
also Demos: you are a citizen of a great democratic com-
munity: you are a potential constituent of the Parliament
After
of Man, the Federation of the World.‘ INLAt] this I usually
burst into loud cheers, which do credit to my enthusiastic
nature. Tonight, however, I shall [do nothing of the sort:
I shall] say 'Dont talk nonsense. My name is not Demos: it
is Bernard Shaw. My address is not the British Empire, [nor]
and
the United States [of America,]’APor] wherever the love of
liberty burns in the heart of man: it is at such and such
a number in such and such a street in London; and it will
be time enough to discuss my seat in the Parliament of Man
when that celebrated institution comes into existence. I
279
do not L further, that L_or that you have any
A¢dontl believelfl\your name is Demos /{: nobody's name is
address."
Demos; and all I can make of your address is that you have
no address, and are just a tramp--if indeed you exist at
all.']
You will notice that I am too polite to call Demos
Lia gasbag, . Nevertheless,
a windbag /\or a hot air merchant [6; but] I am going to
tonight
ask you to begin our study of Democracy/Aby considering it
first as a big balloon, filled with gas or hot air, and sent
on high all the_pegple of the countpy will be
up Aso that A[you shall be kept] looking up [at the sky
at it while their Ip_
whilst] Aother peOple [are] pick Aing your] pockets. AlWhen
is truegyou can have ayplace in
the balloon comes down to earth every five years or so you
Lybut only by $23.
are invited to get into] the baSket/Niif you can] throw/\out
somebody else.
‘fqone of the peOple who are sitting tightly in it; but as
you can afford neither the time nor the money, and there are
forty millions of you and hardly room for six hundred in the
basket, the balloon goes up again with much the same lot in
280
it and leaves you where you were before.] I think you will
. d_0e_s
admit that the balloon as an image of DemocracylAForrespondls]
roughly’actual
/\t° theA [parliamentary] fact [s].
the subject a little further.
Now let us examine/\Ia more poetic conception of
‘Whenever a modern statesman has1u3 find an excuse for some—
Democracy.]
thing, for instance a war, he usually declares it is being
waged to make the world safe for democracy.
Abraham Lincoln [is represented as] standing amid the
ed
23ing]
carnage [of the battlefield] of Gettysburg, [and] declar
was
that all that slaughter of Americans by Americans/AJoccurred]
in order that Democracy, defined as government pg the peOple
for the peOple py_the people, should not perish from the
that
â€Jthis] famous peroration to pieces and
agtually
see what there’AJreally] is inside it. [(By the way, Lincoln
earth. [Let us] pick
did not really declaim it on the field of Gettysburg; and
the American Civil War was not fought in defence of any such
principle, but, on the contrary, to enable one half of the
United States to force the other half to be governed as they
281
did not wish to be governed. But never mind that. I men-
tioned it only to remind you that it seems impossible for
statesmen to make speeches about Democracy, or journalists
to report them, without obscuring it in a cloud of humbug.)]
Take
’N[Now for] the three articles of the definition.
First,
[Number One:] Government pf the people; that, evidently,
is necessary: a human community can no more exist without
a government than a human being can exist without a co-
ordinated control of its breath[ing] and blood circulation.
Secondly, .That
[JNumber Two:] Government for the people, â€\is most impor-
all right in his
tant. Dean Inge put [it perfectly for] us â€then] he called
broadcast talk last Monday.
Democracy a form of society which means equal consideration
ï¬nrall. He added that it is a Christian principle, and
d
[that,] as a Christian, he believelS] in it° So do I. That
/\
§_ Lybecause
is why I insist on equality of income . AEqual considera-
/\
one man man
tion for [a person] with a/&hundred a year and one’Awith a
£5 a year / guite Thirdly
undred thousand is impossible. [But Number Threezl
A A A A
282
. That
Government py_the peOple, /\is quite [a] different [matter].
All the monarchs, [all the tyrants, all the] dictators,;i%§ll
the] Die-hard Tories are agreed that we must be governed.
[Democrats like the Dean and myself are agreed that we must
be governed with equal consideration for everybody.] But we
this thirdgpart of the definition
repudiate AJNUmber Three] on the ground that the people can-
It
not govern. A[The thing] is a physical impossibility.
Every citizen cannot be a ruler any more than every boy can
governors
be an engine driver or a pirate king. A nation of â€Jprime
ministers] or dictators is as absurd as an army of field
marshals. Government by the peOple [is not and never can
be a reality: it] is only a cry by which demagogues humbug
us into voting for them. [If you doubt this--if] you ask
To
[me] 'Why Should not the peOple make their own laws?“ /\[I
that question I reply by asking another:
need only ask you] 'Why should not the peOple write their own
Thegpegple write their own plays.
plays?" AJThey] cannot . [It is much easier to write a good
/\
283
play than to make a good law.] And there are not a hun-
dred men in the world who can write a play good enough to
stand daily wear and tear [as long as a law must].
[Now comes the question,] If we cannot govern our-
selves, what can we do to save ourselves from being at the
mercy of those Who can govern, and who may quite possibly be
[graspers and scoundrels
[thoroughpaced grafters and scoundrels]? The primitive
thepeople
answer is that [as]/\[we] are always in a huge majority
, and our
[Nwe can, if Arulers Oppress us intolerably, burn their
ThatLyhoweve;L
houses and tear them to pieces. A[This] is not satisfactory.
Decent peOple never do it until they have [quite] lost their
heads; and when they have lost their heads [they are] as
they will down
likely as not [to] burn the wrong house and tear the
/\ /\
Theyjudgment and the execution of a
/\
ruler, or a ruler's scapegoat, is an act which requires a
wrong man to pieces.
high degree of political intelligence.
When we have what is called a pOpular movement very few
284
taking
people Adwho take] part in it know what it is all about. I
once saw a [real] popular movement [in London]. People
rushing ,every-
[were running excitedly] through the street[s]. ’Avaery-
body joining
one who saw them doing it immediately joined] in the
movement
[rush. They ran simply] because everyone else was
in
[doing] it. It was most impressive [to see thousands of
/\
peOple sweeping along at full speed like that. There could
be no doubt that it was] literally a pOpular movement. I
ascertained afterward[s] that it was started by a runaway
cow. That cow had an important share in my education as a
political philos0pher; [and I can assure you that] if you
will study crowds[, and lost] and terrified animals [, and
things like that, instead of reading books and newspaper
of
articles,] you will learn a great deal/\[about] politics
Parliamentary
from them. Most Ageneral elections, [for instance,] are
The election was
[nothing but] stampedes. AJOur] last but one waas]a conspic-
285
a stampede and cow!
uous example of this. The cow was a Russian [one].
[I think we may take it that neither mob violence
nor popular movements can be depended on as checks upon
the abuse of power by governments.] One might suppose that
democracy in the
â€Jat least they] would act’A[as a] last resort when an
autocrat goes mad and commits outrageous excesses of
tyranny and cruelty. But it [is a curious fact that they]
does. signal
never/\[do.] Take two Affamous] cases: those of Nero and
Tsar Paul [the First] of Russia. If Nero had been an ordin-
no one wogld ever have heapd of
ary professional fiddler [She would probably have been no
himI and
worse a man than any member of the wireless orchestra.] If
no one would
Paul had been a lieutenant in a line regiment â€Ewe should
ever
never] have heard of him. But when [these two poor fellows
were] invested with [absolute] powers over their fellow-
these men
creatures/«[they] went mad, and did such appalling things that
dealt with
they had to be/\[ki11ed] like mad dogs. Only, it was not the
who dealt with
peOple A[that] rose up and/«[killed] them. They were dispatched
286
quite privately by [a very select circle of] their own body-
On the other hand, take the execution of the un-
guard[s]. AJFor a genuinely democratic execution of un-
popular
popular statesmen we must turn to the] brothers DeWitt,
[Who were] torn to pieces by a Dutch mob in the seventeenth
century. They were neither tyrants nor autocrats. [On the
contrary, one of them had been imprisoned and tortured for
his resistance to the despotism of William of Orange; and
the other had come to meet him as he came out of prison.]
E.
The mob was on the side of the autocratpc We may take it
that the shortest way for a tyrant to get rid of [a] trouble-
talkers
some/«Ichampionl of liberty is to raise a hue and cry
them E.
against A5him as [an] unpatriotic person“, and leave the
mob to do the rest after supplying them with a well tipped
that
ringleader. Nowadays [Jthis] is called direct action
. Theyproletariat
[by the revolutionary proletariat. Those who put their
faith in it soon find that proletariats] are never revolu-
tionary,[and][that their] direct [action, when it is con-
287
trolled at all, is usually controlled by police agents.]
Democracy [, then,] cannot be government by the
peOple: it can only be government by consent of the gov-
make as-
erned. Unfortunately, when democratic statesmen Adpropose
surances to that effect do not
to govern us by our own consent,] they find that we/\[dont]
want to be governed at all, and that we regard rates and
taxes [and rents] and death duties as intolerable burdens.
What we want to know is how little government we can get
along with without being murdered in our beds. [That ques-
tion cannot be answered until we have explained what we
mean by getting along. Savages manage to get along. Un-
ruly Arabs and Tartars get along.] The only rule in the
matter is that the civilized way of getting along is the
way of corporate action, not individual action; and cor-
porate action involves more government than individual
action.
[Thus] government [, which] used to be a comparatively
288
but it
simple affair, Afoday/«has to manage an enormous develOp-
ment of Socialism and Communism. Our industrial and social
life is set in a huge communistic framework of public road-
ways, streets, bridges, water supplies, power supplies,
lighting, tramways, schools, dockyards, and public [aids and]
of all kinds and proud
conveniences, employing a â€sprodigious] army of police,
/\
inspectors, teachers, and officials of all grades in hun—
dreds of departments. We have found by bitter experience
our mines, and
that it is impossible to trustINfactories,‘Nworksh0ps [, and
guidance an elaborate code of
mines] to private A\[management]. Only [by stern] laws
enforced by constant inspection have [we] stOpped the
ghastly they used to
[monstrous] waste of human life and welfare â€fit cost]
cause
when [it was] left uncontrolled by [the] Government. During
the war our attempt to leave the munitioning of the army to
borders
private enterprise led us to the A\[verge] of defeat and
caused [an] appalling slaughter [of our soldiers]. When
289
was
[the Government took] the work’N[out of private hands and
had it] done in national factories it was at once success-
ful. The private firms [were still allowed to do what little
they could; but they] had to be taught to do it economically,
and to keep their accounts prOperly, by Government officials.
Our big capitalist enterprises now run to the Government for
help as a lamb [runs] to its mother. They cannot [even] make
an extension of the Tube railway in London without Govern-
help
ment/«laidl. Unassisted private capitallism] is [breaking
down or] getting left behind [in all directions. If all
is what we have already. With-
our] Socialism and Communism/\[and the drastic taxation of
outï¬ggvernment help all
unearned incomes which finances it were to st0p,] our pri-
vate enterprises would drOp like shot stags [, and we should
all be dead in a month]. When Mr Baldwin tried to win
this
flJthe] last election by declaring that Socialism had been a
failure whenever [and wherever it had been] tried, Social-
290
ism went over him like a steam roller and handed his office
Last month my friend, Dean
to a Socialist Prime Minister. l<Nothing
Inge, repeated the statement. I have only one question to
ask him: Where dpes he expect to go when he dies.
have‘g
could/\save/\us in the war but [a great extension of]
a
Socialism; and [now] it is clear [enough] that only still
socialism
AJit] can repair the ravages of the
greater extension[s] of
war and keep pace with the growing requirements of civili-
zation.
What we have to ask ourselves [, then,] is not
whether we will have Socialism and Communism or not, but
whether Democracy can keep pace with the develOpments of
both that are being forced on us by the growth of national
and international corporate action.
Now corporate action is impossible without a govern-
ing body. It may be the central Government: it may be a
the the
municipal corporation,’A[a] county council, Afa] district
291
[council,] or [a] parish council. It may be the board of
directors of a joint stock company, or of a trust made by
All these govern-
combining several joint stock companies. A[Such boards,]
ing bodies are
elected by the votes of the Shareholders, [are little States
within the State, and very powerful ones, too, some of them.]
actually at least
If they have not/«laws [and kings] ,INthey have by-laws and
[chairmen. And] you and I, the consumers of their services,
these and the company they,
are more at the mercy of Afthe] boards ï¬fthat organize them
preppesent
thanlwe are at the mercy of parliament. [Several active]
politicians who began as Liberals and are now Socialists
have said [to me] that they were converted by seeing that
the nation had to choose, not between governmental control
of industry and control by [separate] private individuals
[kept in order by their competition for our custom,] but
between governmental control and control by gigantic trusts
but no
wielding great power‘AIWithout] responsibility, and having
no object but to make as much money out of us as possible.
292
Our Government is [at this moment] having much more trouble
at home
/\on whom we are dependent for
with the private corporation[s]
[our] coals and cotton goods than with France or the United
States [of America]. We are in the hands of our corporate
bodies, public or private, for the satisfaction of our every-
day needs. [Their powers are life and death powers. I
need not labor this point: we all know it.]
But what we do not all realize is that we are equally
dependent on corporate action for the satisfaction of our
The told us last Monday
religious needs. l‘Dean/N[Inge tells us] that our [general]
had
elections/\[have] become public auctions at which the con-
tending parties bid against one another [for our votes] by
[each] promising [us] a larger Share [than the other] of
the plunder [of the minority. Now] that is perfectly true.
1 though as yet
The contending parties do not [as yet] venture/«to put it
exactly in those words[; but that is what it comes to. And]
the Dean's profession obliges him to urge his congregation,
293
. z for
which is much wider than that of St Pauhk's] (it extends
across the Atlantic), always to vote for the party which
pledges itself to go farthest in enabling those of us who
have great possessions to sell them and give the price to
Now, this
the poor. /\[But we cannot do this as private persons. It]
must be done by the Government or not at all. Take my own
case. I am not a young man with great possessions; but
supeprtax
[I am] an old man paying enough in income tax and flJsurtax]
_meet the ,
to â€Jprovide] dolels] for [some] hundreds of [unemployed
and] old age pensioners. [I have not the smallest objec-
this plan
tion to this: on the contrary,] I advocated [it] strongly
as a good Christian
AJfor years] before I had any income worth taxing. But I
until raised
could not do it â€Jif] the Government)N[did not arrange] it
for me. [If the Government ceased taxing my superfluous
money and redistributing it among people who have no incomes
at all,] I could do nothing by myself. What could I do?
294
in
[Can you suggest anything?] I could send ;jmy] war bonds
to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and invite him to cancel
ed
the part of the National Debt that they representâ€:
and he
would undoubtedly thank me [in the most courteous official
terms] for my patriotism. But the poor would not get any of
it. The [other] payers of [surtax and] income tax and
super-tax by it.
‘AJdeath duties] would save [the interest they now have to
pay on it: that is all.] I should [only] have made the
the poor
rich richer andlm[myself] poorer. I could burn all my share
enable
certificates and [inform the secretaries of] the companies
to the
A[that they might] write off/\[that much of their] capital
they represent. But only
indebtednessf< [\theINresult would be a bigger
other
dividend for the/\[rest of the] shareholders [, with the poor
No doubt also I could
out in the cold as before]. AJI might] sell my war bonds
[and share certificates] for cash, and throw the money into
snatched pp
the street to be AJscrambled for;] but it would be snatched
295
up, not by the poorest, but by the best fed [and most able-
sold
bodied] of the scramblers. Besides, if we all [Jtried to
sell] our bonds and shares--and [this is what you have to
consider; for] Christ's advice was not addressed to me
had
‘Afhave] great possessions—-the result
they would all go for
would be/{that their value would fall to] nothing, [as]
[alone] but to all who
be
the Stock Exchange would/«[immediately become a market in
which there were] all sellers and no buyers. Accordingly,
of mine
any spare money/«[that the Government leaves me] is in-
biggest
vested where I can get the/\[highest] interest and the best
and
security /\[, as thereby I can] make sure that it goes
thegreatest amount of
where it is most wanted and gives â€Jimmediate] employment.
Hhis is the best I can do without Government interference:
indeed] any other way of dealing with my spare money would
be foolish and demoralizing; but the result is that I become
richer and richer, and the poor become relatively poorer and
poorer. So you see] I cannot even be a Christian except
296
through Government action; and neither can the Dean.
Now let us get down to our problem. We cannot gov—
we see that vest others
ern ourselves; yet â€if we [entrust the immense] /\powers
with the vast
[and revenues] which are necessary [in an effective modern
they go
Government] to an absolute monarch or dictator, flJhe goes]
they happen to be
more or less mad unless /4he is a] quite extraordinary and
ordinarily .g
;Jtherefore very seldom] obtainable person . [Besides,
modern government is not a one—man job: It is too big for
that.] If we resort to a [committee or] parliament of
superior persons, they will [set up an oligarchy and] abuse
.__ if we
their power for their own benefit. Our dilemma is that/\
.
ourselves
[men in the lump] cannot govern /{themselves; and yet, as
William Morris put it, no man is good enough to be another
man's master.] We need to be governed, and [yet] to control
our governors. But the best governors will not accept any
control except that of their own consciences; and, as we
[who are governed] are [also] apt to abuse any power of
297
and
control we have, our ignorance /\[, our] passions, [our
private and immediate interests] are constantly in conflict
and
with the knowledge /\[,,the] wisdom, and [the] public spirit
and regard for the future of our best qualified governors.
But
’«[Still,] if we cannot control our governors, can
not we
â€Jwe not] at least choose [them] and change them if they do
not suit?
Let me invent a primitive example of democratic choice.
because no one
It is always best to take imaginary example/{sz‘ they of-
pp
/\
can then be offended.
fend nobody.] Imagine [then that] we are the inhabitants of
and
a village/\[. We] have to elect somebody for the office of
postman. There are several candidates; but one stands out
for
conspicuously, /\[because] he has frequently treated us at
the public—house, has subscribed a shilling to our [little]
and he is also able to pose as
flower Show, A[has a kind word for the children when he
passes, and is] a victim of Oppression by the squire be-
298
cause his late father was one of our most successful poach-
ers. We elect him triumphantly; [and he is duly installed,
him with an office, a suit and a badge
uniformed,] provide/4d with] a red bicycle, and [given a
and give him the But not much has been thought
batch ofJINletters to deliver. [AlAs his motive in seeking
the post has been pure ambition, he has not thought much
beforehand] about his duties; and it now occurs to him for
the first time that he cannot read. SO he hires a boy to
is con-
come round with him and read the addresses. The boy'â€Jcon-
cealed while [goes to the
ceals himself] in the lanelA[Whilst] the postman Adelivers
house, and
the letters /\[at the house,] takes the Christmas boxes
[, and gets the whole credit of the transaction]. In course
the postman ‘
of time [\[he] dies with a high reputation [for efficiency
again pp
in the discharge of his duties;] and we elect [another]
/\ ï¬x
person,
equally illiterate/\[successor on similar grounds.] But by
has
this time the boy has grown up and become an institution.
/\
He presents himself to the new postman as an [established
and] indispensable feature of the postal system, and finally
299
becomes recognized and paid by the village [as such].
a picture the
Here you have [Gthe perfect image] of [\[a pOpularly
elected] Cabinet Minister and the Civil Service department
over Which he presides. It may work [very] well; for our
postman [, though illiterate,] may be a very capable fellow;
and the boy Who reads the addresses [for him may] be [quite]
else
incapable of doing anything/\[more]. But this does not
, and
always happenA: Whether it happens or not, the system
system
is not a democratic/\[reality]: it is a democratic illu—
sion. The boy [, when he has ability enough to take advan-
tage of the situation,] is [the] master Of the man. The
person elected to do the work is not really doing it: he
a:
is a popular humbug A[who] is merely doing what a permanent
Official tells him to do. That is how it comes about that
EB
we are now governed by a Civil Service which has such I“
enormous power that its regulations are taking the place of
the laws of England, though some of them are made for the
300
convenience of the officials without [the slightest] re-
gard to the [convenience or even the] rights of the public.
these officials
[And] how arelï¬[our Civil Servants] selected? Mostly by an
educational test Which nobody but an expensive[ly] school[ed]
youth can pass [, thus making the most powerful and effec-
tive part of our government an irresponsible class govern-
ment].
we? The vote:
[Now,] what control have/«[your or I over the Services?
We have votes. I have used mine a few times to see what it
.32
is like.] Well, [it is like this.] When A[thelelection
approaches, two or three persons of whom I know nothing
write to me soliciting my vote and enclosing a list of meet-
ings, an election address, and a polling card. One of the
with the
addresses reads like an article in The MorningyPost â€J, and
above a series of ex-
has a] Union Jackxpn]it~ Another is like /\The Daily News
tracts from
or Manchester Guardian. [Both might have been compiled from
the editorial waste paper baskets of a hundred years ago.]
301
written
A third [address], more up-to-date and much better â€Jphrased],
convinces me that the sender [has] had it written for him at
Eccleston Square, There is perhaps
[Nthe headquarters of the Labor Party. /\A fourth,
which
’N[the most hopelessly out of date of them all,] contains
ppparently some
â€\scraps of the early English [translations] of the Com-
munist Manifesto of 1848. I have no guarantee that any of
are
these documents â€\[were] written by the candidates. They
convey nothing [whatever] to me as to the [ir] character
of those from whom they are supposed
or political capacity“. The half-tone photographic por-
to emanate. Even does
trait[s which adorn the front pages do] not [even] tell
/\
for theyportraits have generally
me their age/\[s, having] been taken twenty years ago. If
I go to one of the meetings I find a schoolroom packed with
funnier and cheaper
peOple who find an election meetinglï¬icheaper and funnier]
the there are a few
than A[a] theatre. On the platform’A[sit one or two poor]
men who have worked hard to keep [party] politics alive in
themselves
the constituency. They ought /\to be the candidates; but
302
they have no more chance of such eminence than [they have]
of possessing a Rolls-Royce car. They move votes of confi-
but
dence /\[in the candidate, though] as the candidate is a
how can anyyone
stranger to them and [to] everybody elselkipresent nobody
in him?
can possibly] feel any [such] confidencef< [They lead the
the candidate
applause for him;] they prompt/\[him] When questions are
asked; and when he is completely floored they jump up and
say
[scry] 'Let me answer that, Mr Chairman!‘ [and then pre-
catch words and
tend that he has answered it.] The Old/«Shibboleths are
turned vitality
,eroned] over; and nothing has any/«[sense or reality] in
opposite
it except the vituperation of the AJopposition] party, which
is [received with shouts of relief by the audience. Yet it
is] nothing but an exhibition of bad manners. If I vote
gentlemen
for one of these/«[candidates], and he [or she] is elected,
have exercised the right of
I am supposed to/\[be enjoying a democratic control of the
and
government--to be exercising] government pf_myself, /\ for
and
myself, /\‘py.myself. DO you wonder that the Dean cannot
303
democracy?
believe suchlfl[nonsense? If I believed it I should not be
and liberpy
fit to vote at all.] If this is Democracy,/Nwho can blame
Signor Mussolini for describing it as a putrefying corpse?
[The candidates may ask me what more they can do for
me but present themselves and answer any questions I may
put to them. I quite admit that they can do nothing; but
that does not mend matters.] What I should like is a real
the candidates
test of [their] capacity. Shortly before the war a doctor
in San Francisco discovered that if a drOp of a candidate's
could
blood,«[¢an] be obtained on a piece of blotting paper it
would be was
â€dis] possible to discover within half an hour what /\[is]
wrong with him physically. What I am waiting for is [the
discovery of a process by which on delivery of] a drop of
a candidate's - which will enable us to
AJhis] blood or a lock of his hair/\[we can ascertain] what
say
is right with him mentally. We could then have a graded
series [of panels of capable persons for all employments,
304
public or private,] and not allow any person [, however popu-
public
lar,] to undertake AJthe] employment [of governing us] un-
1
less he [or she] were/«[On] the apprOpriate panel. At the
lower end of the scale there would be a panel of persons
qualified to take part in a parish meeting; at the higher
there would be/those
end [Na panel ofï¬[persons] qualified to act as [Secretaries
of State for] Foreign [Affairs or Finance] Ministers. At
cent
present not more than Upper/\[thousand] of the population
higher But there
would be available for the/«[highest] panel. A[I should
would be under such a system
then be in no danger/\of electing a postman and finding that
not p£_
he could [neither] read/\[nor] write. My choice [of candi-
dates] would be [perhaps] more restricted than at present:
but [I do not desire liberty to choose windbags and nincom-
poops to represent me in parliament; and] my power to choose
s be as
Abetween one [qualified] candidate and another would/\[give
wide as is possible in theypresent state of affairs.
me as much control as is either possible or desirable. The]
should
voting and counting/\[would] be done by machinery: I should
305
be able to
‘AJconnect my telephone with the prOper Office;] touch a
button; and the machinery would do the rest.
this,
Pending/\[such a completion of the American doctor's
The
discovery,] how are we to go on? A(Well, as] best we can,
we have.
with the sort of government AJthat our present system pro-
duces. Several reforms are possible without any new dis-
pystem of in a modern
covery.] Our present/\ parliament is obsolete â€J: it can
state.
no more do the work of a modern State than Julius Caesar's
galley could do the work of an Atlantic liner.] We need [in
central parliaments and several
these islands] two or three Afadditional federal legisla-
regional ones to correlate the work and maintain contact.
tures, working on our municipal committee system instead
of our parliamentary system. We need a central authority to
co-ordinate the federal work. Our obsolete little internal
frontiers must be obliterated, and our units of local govern-
ment enlarged to dimensions compatible with the recent prodi-
gious advances in facility of communication and co-Operation.
306
Commonwealth affairs and supernational activities through
the League of Nations or otherwise will have to be provided
for, and Cabinet function to be transformed. All the pseudo-
democratic obstructive functions of our political machinery
must be ruthlessly scrapped, and the general problem of
government approached from a positive viewPoint at which
mere anarchic national sovereignty as distinguished from
self-government will have no meaning.]
But no system will be of any use except in the final
[I must conclude by warning you that When everything
resort we have good conscienceslgnd good public spirit on the
has been done that can be done, civilization will still be
part both of the_government and voter. We are prevented
dependent on the consciences of the governors and the
from being good citizens and our governors are prevented from
governed. Our natural dispositions may be good; but]
being goodpgovernors by all sorts oflpersonal interests
andyprejudices. The fact is not as citizens should have
we have been badly brought up, AJand are full Of anti-
been brought up. We must set to work to bring_up our child-
social personal ambitions and prejudices and snobberies.
ren to be better citizens than we are. There is one country
Had we not better teach our children to be better citizens
that is doing it, and that countryyis Russia.
than Ourselves? We are not doing that at present. The
307
Pray go home and
Russians are.] That is my last word. [KlThink over it.]
think of it.
PART II
Work Sheets: "On Democracy"
The work sheets which follow were completed early
in the process of analyzing Shaw's speech, "On Democracy."
Due to the nature of work sheets, in some instances the
findings which appear in detail here are summarized in
Chapter IV, while in the other cases some details appear
in that chapter which may not be listed on the work sheets.
Since the primary purpose of the preparation of the
work sheets was to aid the writer, many abbreviations
were used. A few which appear frequently are: ex for
example; 9 for cause; and g_for effect. Downward arrows
indicate that this particular proof continues through
several levels of the outline. Furthermore, the outline
form found in the first column of each page corresponds
with that of the substance outline, pages 213-233 of this
study.
308
309
.oum :.Eammn Hmnsumc
m.cemuflum= "emHanm>flc5=
mo on: “Hmccsa Homemav
“mxflamflp «0 move mo coflpmu
Icmmmumwu anamscs msHm mEmm
mcofluomwn mnemommo Usaucmm
Imam ca mHquDHum Hmaamumm
cowenmmeoo Uflbmflcmaome
mo Hoes: “coeuomwu Hmsoflpoam
manflmmom ounces 0» mouom
Hmnusmc no end "mmoncm How
poms on on coflumuumsaaellmmm
mo coeumfluommp mo mcflccflmmm
acme
nonspm mcwcmmo mo >bHHmEHom
NmomZHm
amusam coaumm umH mo mmD
m>fluomnno mason CH 00cm
tapas mo EOOmH3 “H mo mmD
mucmuuomafl
Hmsuse .Muflameunmmï¬e
mo mmmubm “HMHSHQ mo mmD
mamm mo mocmuuomï¬ï¬‚
mo coanmmma pap =.H= so was
AflUHmBm 92¢
mflmm ho NBHMOEBDé
coebnmmmï¬ .Q
.m 60 inane
Iamumcmmv xm Amy
.m mo AOONH
IHMHOSOOV xm Adv
coeuummm< .m
AbcwEQOHm>mp
“sonbsounb moan
Inmuv macesb OMHHGD
OBu mo hmoamcm Ocean
IEH msHm coï¬pnmmmc .H
UHQOH Unm30u
3we> mo .umlucofluummm< .m
Demon mo
pcmsmocDOOGMIIGOfluhmmm< .¢
coï¬uosooubcH
AdUHGOA
310
ANV.Q.H.m mm wusuosuum and
IflEHm pcm mOUAOSo OHO3 mEmm
mocmflcdm mo
mmcmm poom mo coflumoflHmEH
huflpusmnm
onecmoomu Ob mocwepsm
Mom cosmemmp waucmummmd
:%>mz map aduom= c,
=mmm
mnp mo waded:
mcemmunm
euso xmeuï¬m: m>euflummmn
:msonmnommuua
“momsmcmH
wu0mcmm pmummmmu
a oamaomam amnuume
hbwuoabsm
mm mamm mo mmD
coflpummmï¬ .m
mcï¬pmomum
cab £be3 hmoamcm
smaadsa “pamEmumum .m
mamm Ob mucoumwmm
.
Ausoamsousuv m>auumnno
mcflmn wucmepsm mo Eopmfl3
mo coaumUaHmSA =lH= «0 was
Ami 60 o Ami
cadmnm
ou cmozcmn
an we seem
A,Amv
Amv
Amy
Ape
on
Any
A m0
amam an lav
IIkGOEflummv
OOHMHUOQmCD
"mocmpfl>mamv
n m0
amen mm nbuom
usm “coHuHmmm<
n no seam
Ami
Amy
Adv
311
mwflamflmflp \z
mOHHmEHIImOmmuam
mueuu mo mm:
Show msmonHO
ca ucmEmon>mn
sowuecemmp amoemoHOE>um
SH coflumoemwcomumm Mo on:
“sowumwsv uuwuflp mo me
coemflamulhomnooemp no .mo
emaaasa =lumauma Hmuaamo m
Ape3 mceccï¬mmn OHOB mcoq:
conmsmumm cmnv Hmnbmu
mCHGGM#mHm©c5 co mmmuum
“mmmflamn Ham mo consHUcH
mmocmmm
I>muuxm um>onm
mo :oHumHHUmOQ
mumsuflmm
mo own man mamm mo
mcoeumfluummp HMSmDGD
umxmmmm
m50e>mum on mocmnmmmm
mï¬uwu mcHBch
wow wow: CH :m3: m0 mm:
cosmepsm mo Eopme3
ou Hmmmmm was :w3: mo own
a .,
Apmwammm hpmwuam m>mn
uanE moccapsm £0w£3v
gmmm ado:
coauumwmm
“H m0 emucmvfl>m: .m
4 mo.w ucmnmmmm .H
coeuflcflmmn .¢
coeuummmg .H
Npom
.m
.N
mmomusm mo conH>HQ .H
mmomusm
mo ucmEmpmumuncoHuummmc .0
Amy
Amy
moans mamw mcflaamo
.m mo m @8336 a
312
mumHHMpHmmu
H>OSOE .mEHb "OOHHQEH.;
pmmum ucmecum>om
upmeHm umxoom “OOHHQEH
pcmEMHHHmmuuflm
so: no mam "OOHHQEH
mumnuemm mDOHOEsn mo mm:
“NmOHMGMIICOfluMHMmz
unmewumum
IHOUCD UHuUmEHHUIHuG¢.>
Hm50fl>flpce
as we uwcmpmwa 30mm
"UmHHmEH um>onm H £ue3
.wollucmï¬mon>Op OmocmHmm
\/
mmmcwuflaom
ou mocmummmu ease»:
"OOGOHUSM Ob mmmuppm bomnen
mamm Op mocmummmm
:50»: mm mamm Ob mocmuwmmm
:3mgm =
as us@ .mamm ou mocmuwmmm
coHuHmmmï¬ .Q
.m mo unommsm
Ilcoï¬pmcmmem .m
.m
.m
bamEmon>mt
HMUHmOHocougo .H
ucmsmoam>m© Hmoï¬moncm
nsofluflcemmpIIGOAuummmm .m
.U
.Q
mocmwummxm
HMSOmumm um
mo =wocmpe>m= .m
m mo m “coflunomm< .N
x, .U
313
coeumuoso
coflummHOHuHmm mocmfltsm mxmï¬
mmmnnm HMHHAEMM mo
“.m.D mo EmHOHuHHU
“wands mHmEHm ou soap
Insuflm XOHQEOU mo coeuospmm
0WD
=nmusmamam: so
on: ma UOHMHmcmucHIIEmmoumm
coflumummmmxm
=mmomHm
on coeumuoumm mDOEmm
menu xoflm: :nGOHummocoo
oeumome "umeaflemw mo me
usmï¬moumw mom mxmm
ban GOmeHmmEOU mxma
ou mosmflpsm m3OHH¢.Az
cowbomam
mcflccfl3ummam mcomEOm
p50 mcHBOHJp
mamm
Sue3 conflnmmaoo OOAHQEH
mocmwpsm
mo mocmmflaamucfl ou Hmmmm<
"omflamEH
.mm
m mo unommsm
IICOHuummmm Adv
coebummmm
“coflbflcewmp
mo coflme>ep uwa .m
coebecflmmp
mo ucwï¬moam>mn .N
c0emum> emsnu:
“a mo mucmpfl>m .Q
coemum> :msnï¬dï¬:
“a mo mocmpe>m .m
Acoam
Immumepv coeuummm< .H
cowumuosq
mo mm: I coauACHmmn .0
NHMEESm
an
.m we m lac
314
unommsm
mmEoocH \/ "GOAuMNH
OHMHUOQm ou mocmummmm
Iamumcmwanv
hbeamsqm
Haï¬ocmcwm m>ms
pasonm Ham muommnmza .m
muflamsvm
aweosmcem mopsaucï¬
coaumumpflmcou Hmsvm..m
Acoflumumpemcoo Hmsvm
O>Hmumu pazonm HH¢V.H
.Hz mo mm: "memsssucmlmv
thHOSqu
moamflucflnm "soeuummmm
cmepmflnnu £ue3 GOHpMHUOmm¢
mawm cam damn mnebmflUOmm< Icoepmcmmem Amy
Acoflm
Immumflp HOGHEV
coeunmmmm Adv
cofluummmm
usofluecï¬mmp
mo c0flmfl>ï¬p tam .n
w you
Atonwamnmcmmv
mmmsmcma HmcoHuoEm mo OmD
muauoauss Amy
1 m unommsm
uMHHHEmw may no comma
Aacuuooua
unmEmon>mp HMUHmOHmca “mmoamcmï¬mv
315
:Hmmu pcm HMOB: mo OOHO£U
OH Hmeumume Spfl3 cow
Iflummeoo OOHHQEH paw uomuen
Osmonep
nmsounu pmmoam>mn
=©u5mnm= wo Om: uwmonc<
wocmuwmmu
HMHHHEOM mo own n%monc¢
3m5m mo ammumucw wmeno
map £ua3 muocum>om
may no Sam mowao
opp mummuucoonuhumessm
mcflueu3>mHm
mo mmsmomn pommmm
temps mm: mhmHm mo
coeumupmsHHH mo OUHOSU
H mo unom
Imsm_msam .flHH
.He
ucmEmumum
“hmonc4 .H
0 mo mooum
mm 0mm:
“coeuummmd Any
9,.HH
pnommsm
"mmoncm
I xm .H
lav mo
phommsm
coepmue
Iamumcmw Amy
0 mo mooum mm
poms "coepummmm AHV
eons
nummmMIlcoHuHcemmp
no nonma>ae cum .0
Amy coauummmm
mo promos Amy
316
=mcwcumma
xoone mo msam> £ue3 mono
lenmmxm mo ODHM> mmHmmEOU
\r
coflbmupmdaae mo mmD
wmmsmcma Ue>e> mo me
mmowem Op Emsu
ummp “momsoa Mamas swan
«mpuo3 SOEEOU um» pe>fl>
mamnpcsoom .mnmummnm
"momsmcma HmcoHuoEm mo mmD
msaï¬dn “mmzmommï¬mp
"mmmsmcmH HMGOAHOEO no on: ;
=mcacamuu=
Hmcomumm Op wocwummmm
\7
i
mamï¬mxm HMSOmHOm
Aemco 0c: uocv 3mm >Hm>
"mcflwmflamsv nonpusm
#0: mm hamxfla
"OCH%MHHMDU HOSbHOm
manomm
ebcmomp: on wocmummwm
Acmaaï¬umcfl mopwv
=mn Manemmom muedq
>mE: â€mEumu mcwhmeamsc
coepmuumsaaï¬
Eoum mcflcommmm .0
coeumnbmsHHH
mo cosmSHUcou .Q
\73
coeumï¬uommnaav
N DHOQQSm "xo
I coaumuumsaafl
mo ucmï¬mumum .m
< mo uuommsm mm
OOHOMMOICOHbHOmmd .m
H m0 U .3
H mo m .m
d mo UHOQQSm mm
OOHOMMOIGOHUHOmmé .H
maesaaanammom
mcebomanIGOanmmmï¬ .<
@HQSOUIICOHHHmwm¢ . H H
U mo.unomm5m mm
poms “cowuummmd Amy
317
mmmsmGMH epmtmoHe
0cm HMHHHEMM mo mmD
c0flm5Hocoo m>ï¬pmmmc kn
©03OHHOM ucwï¬mumum O>Huflmom
\r
OHHuMm nm>flumunmz
:mHUHHU “UmHmm :
mHeEHm
mopsaocfl “momsmcmH UH>H>
ucmcwuswea mcflHIHsmm
.muumOSUHOIOHmz somenmm
IEOU mopsauce cowumcmHm
Ixm msouoesn UHMï¬ummm
IIHmenmumï¬ O>HumuumsHHH
mommmoxm msommmnuso muss
I800 .OmE moom .mocmHOH>
DOE "momsmcma UH>H>
=>ms= an ememeamsa mmeH
l
pcsoumxomn mpflz mmHHmEH
95
m m0
monopfl>m mm powwow
IMO “coepummm< .m
d mo unommsm mm
pmccmucH “coflpummmd .m
wIU "cowuummmd .n
A, E
m mo amen
nucmeumum Adv
m mmon>mp
Icoeuumwm< .m
g mcHuHOQQSn I xm .m
a mo unommsm mm
Ownmmmo am HO O .Q
coepmspwm
mo useï¬mumum .m
d mcfluROQQSm xm .H
mmwuflaï¬nflmmom mcfluumnmn
I cowunmmmm “ummmmm .<
318
..mHmflCHom
MOO mo Hounmsmam mcHHHmmmm:
:mumm3 msouumcoe
. .Ummmoum. . .mBMH cumum:
..“QUHH
Ob wanemmomafl= =.mosm
IHHmmxm prbï¬n: "mmmsmcmq
HMHHAEMM mnu ou mucoummmm
mcoam aneuumm
IIumasomcum> «O was
mEmHnoum
SOEEOU on museummmm
codumummmmxm
coflpm>nmmno co pcmm
Imp "coeuom mcHuHSmmH
mchcmmmHm CH :m3: mo mmD
mmcmnu
mcflxmï¬ CH =m3: mo mmD
: 03 3 MO mm:
\/.m
m Mom mocmp
Ie>m “coeunmmmd .H
HHH mo 0 “coeuuwmmm .m
9..
.xw
MOHHQ m0 mweumm
“.c mo mocmpfl>m .H
soap
Iummmm mo cosmï¬>ï¬n .<
consummma .HHH
coamsHUcoo
I cofluummmé .o
\H .n
a mo buomms
xw pmnaamnmcmw .m
m mo uHOQQSm
no I coeuummmd .H
HH mo
coemfl>flplc0flunmmm¢ .m
319
mmoncfl
=md co pwuuom msflmm:
:Hm3 mo momm>mu mnb bbmmmme
:HOHHOH Emwbm
m Oxba . . . EmbHMHUome
absm>m bcwomb Ob mocmnmmmm
mgbcoE 03b
Sb OMOOIIGOAbmummmmxm
h:mOMbm bonm oxea moat:
mmHQmem mebbxm
:bmnboï¬ mbb Ob . . .
n23 m. 8.3 . . . :8...
manmeoaumbmu vegan
Ibcmbmm mo cobbmobHQEH
.. 03 .-
.. m3 .-
m>bmsH0cH
m>bmdaucH
\,
.m
.N
Acmbmv d mo xm .H
pom:
mo bmmmwu 0cm >H «0
coemb>bp “cobbbmmmd .¢
mmdmmb
mSOH>mHm 03b mcbcbnï¬oo
“EOHQOHQ mo bcmEmbem .>H
s...
.9 mo
bbommsm “coebbmmmd .H
HHH mo m I coabummma .n
O HO cpoOHUObm .m
.m
AaoMH
Ibwmmmv 0 mo swam .H
HHH mo cmbw
“cowbbmmmm Amansonv .U
m a m «0 mucmn
Ib>m “cowbumwmd .m
320
mbcmEmbem Obbmewop . Q mcbbbom
nmbcm3 mocwbpsm Ob Hmmmmï¬ =m3: mo OmD IQSm a mo swam .m
D MO
wocmpb>m u>beO£b5< .H
cobmbbwb Ob mocmbmmmm ;/ >H mo xo “Goebbmmmd .Q
mocmbpsm mOUSHOGH 0 mo
EOOmb3 “mama mo hbbbonbsm mocmpb>m mm pmbmmmo
mocmbpsm mo cowbmesmm< Ob mocmummmu cameommw “mama mo >bbbonbs< .m
layman no amass
Hmmmmm HMCOHbOEm bombbc 0 mo mucmpb>m mm
£be3 mbcmEmbem mcbmmOBm pmnmumo “coebummmd .H
:m3: m0 0m: >H mo cmbm “Goebbmmmd .U
mmocmbmmmb cameommm m mo cmbm “Goebbmmmd .m
mwï¬beMHmcmm mcbmmm3m
nmEHOb :UOOMOH: mo Own .3
mmbb
Ibaflnbwmom 03b Ob cobbospmm \/ N mo.m .m
3H
Iuoflbsm mo bcmEmbem
--m «0 muemea>m .m
m m0
bbommdmIIchEmbem .H
r
cowbbmmaoo "=MOHOE= mo Ono mocmbpsm mo SOHmDHUcH bowbfla_ meHMGMIIcOHbHOmmm .m
321
bmboom .Hoom “HOQUHH
nope mo bmmmmm
\/
AOEmexwv UHDQO
mo coebmbbommn
.ï¬UbH mo mote bmmm
IOH £0H£3 mcobmsao
f
Icoo mo mmflbmm mo bma
Goebmbbommp Ubbbbmm
AOEObeOV chamnm
mnb mo coebmbbommn
cowbmmsv
HMUHHObmab no end
n:>chE mDODHMHOmsm:
SOHbMHbmz
zcmo sow Ham bom:
Ob Obbmmp no woman Hmmmm<
mocmï¬psm
Ob mocmbmmmb bowbbn
Hammad HMCOmHOQ mUHHsm
:Gme â€HO .-
mawm mo hbbbonbsm
“wocmbbwmxm Hmcombmm
» 3:
5 mo 0 E
hbbaen
Ibmmom ch ANV
luv
any
:3 to w. E
spades
Ibmmom bma AHV
Goebbmmmg .9
a E
mbbbonbsm
Hmcombmm am
no mocmpb>m Aav
N mo mmbm
bma “coebbmmmm
IcobeHmeHHH .m
mamm mo abbuonbsm
“a mo moc06b>m .N
Hmomn
322
ambuaaanammoa massed
“:6mE mmwa HO Oboe meow:
"smash mo coebmbbummp HMSchD
aaa>auoweno
0cm OmeH HO cOHbMUmeEH
abHGMHbmHHSU Ob
Hmommm "mote mo bmmmmm A,
Ax
Embsbbam Ob Hmmmmd
AmEmbbxmv chamnm
mo cobbmeUmOQ
move mo bmmmmm
AOEmexOV chambm
. mo sobbmbbomwn
: 03 .-
=EOHQOHQ H50 Ob S300
boo ms bob 302:
Ibpdm mo OOHmDHUCH Dewbommm
boom mï¬b
QbHB mammï¬ba mmebbcoo A
=mcobmmmmmom bmmbme
:30 was Ob mummmm
QUGQflUSM mmmVSH OCH
mo mmD
u mUGm
/
coebmne
IHMbmcmm um mo m .N
Goebbmmmm am mo 0 .H
> no
coebsHOm manbmmom .m
> mo
swam mm Umbmmmo «MLW .<
muse
IESm ubmmmmb "Goebbmmmd .>
%,ANV
o mo.w lav
Amv .ANV .AHV
MO 0 “GOflMSHUCOU .0
H
M.
NO .He
Abv
so u .a
\fl any
AC mo m Amy
subabn
unamom sum Ami
323
:hbmsosobmmcoo:
bow :mcommmbe
newbommm be» Habb
Ismsvmmcoocw asbbmwmo
i
:NOOQOG Ucmmmo
xm hbmcbmmEH= nm>HbMHHmz
cobbmmsv HMObebmgm
mmbbmm mcbms chub
Iosbbm mocwbcmm pmocmHmm
a,
hambmcbmbam Owbcmmmbm
mopbm O3bIImEEmen.
O>Hbmubmc OH mocmbpsm
mmpsaucb “x0 mo HObmc
Ibmflbo mm mamm Ob mocmbwmmm
7 law
Ame
Ami
\
m mm>aom Q
mocmea>m “as
m mo GOHbSHOm .n
pom:
amoebmnbomhm .m
Abcmï¬mOHm
I>OU m>beHHmcv
n< mo amen uxm .H
H> m0
GObmH>H© “cowbnmmmd .¢
cOHbsHOm mo cobebSMOH
bo EOHQOHQIIGObeOmmï¬ .H>
N mo 0 .m
.N
GObeNb
IHMHOGOO “0 HO O .H
> M0
GObbsHOm manbmmom .0
324
mocmpb>o
mEHmb poocmbmn “amen Ob mm pmumumo H mo
amoebmnbomka EObm mesh bcmamoam>m© ï¬bb3 com
coppsm “:0mm8b b0OMbmm= Ibbmmsou "Goebbmmm< .N
M.m5am
5 «o m 3
\z \/ .l
a so a 5
\7 0 mo cmbm AHV
mmambbxm blm mOOUOHm
OHDmnm mo mmD mubbcm mo.M .m
emmxon . AHV
mmepmauï¬ 3%? .. saw .u. be .m. E
boas: moon.
IImHHMbOO bcw>mHOHHH m mo.M AHV
m mo.wy.m
bcmEmbembchs l
ObbomEHHoIbbcm . m mo.m ANV
a mom a
EOHQOHQ
Hmuwbmzbommm .m
mHHMbmp Hoses .obmwommm . 0 mo m..©
bCOEmbemno>o n mo.M .0
325
umww "Hammad .AHV mo m Amy
I Q
:cmE GOEEOU: mnb Ob W mo.w “coeb
Hmmmmm “Goebmwsq amoebObmzm IMNAHMHOCOO AHV
coflbbmmmé .b
bmmm â€Hmmmmm \fl ANV
M
NO m “coeb
numb .wbmmmm "Hmmmmm ImNHHMHOGOO AHV
cobbbmmmm .m
MOOHQ bow H mo
woodman coma bcm
:03: mo mm: IUGOQOOIIGOHbHOmmm .m
.:mDQEs£ usasmom:
"mmmsmcmb “cobeHmmmmxm AHV mO.M ANV
mmcmao Sbb3 :cmE mo HmbmmE
son: .nmaaaSMM so was n no team Rev
muons
\ï¬ ANV
cobmcmommpcOLH m mo amen
nxo msob>mbm Ob mocmbmmmm xo Sb mocmbpsm mOOOHUGH "sobbbmmm< AHV
N mO.M .m
326
Hm3om amoebbaom
can SbHMOB £ba3
OObMSUm :muhom maaom:
zcme boom:
maaumbmoo
"combbmmï¬oo msouoaï¬m
Hoes: mnpm
Hasbmp bSMbuomEHss
haw>wbmHOH mo GObmSHUSH
OObememmxm
"mocmbwmmu newbommm
GoebmanMHmcmm Ocean
IEb CH cObeHOmmmxm
zmxba we be bm£3 mom Ob
OOHE poms m>ms H: mMLm
Sb Hoes: nm>beHbmc mo mm:
.....— ~.n—— .—
mocmbpsm abHB
mama cmHHm ObIlembmp
mo bso hammmammom:
mocmbwmwb HchmHOm
.wï¬m Umbamab
“cobbbmmmm
“cobmmmbmbn Adv
m mo.m .n
m we eaam .m
coebnmmmd .N
coebmsbflm
mo mamhamc< .Q
Aev
mum maï¬a Amv
ANV
N no Axmv
moemsa>m lav
GObbmstm
mo mbmhamcd .m
coebmsbbm
mo cobbmbbommn .H
bbommsm mm UOUSU
IOHbcH xw “Goebbmmm4 .m
327
ommbOOHNOMHooEwU
um>HbMHbmc no woman comebmmaou
:mmcmmcos:
mm hbfluonbsm wn
cobbmbbummp u:pmmom
Imdm Em H: CH Emmobmm
:MOHHOH mo mbsosm:
"cobmmooo mo HO>OH
HMDbUOHHObcH can
Hmcobboï¬m mo cobeOHHmEH
:cmcoup mum mï¬bmaon
Inflsm OHO: "momsmcmq
:bb pmumBmcm mag
m: pcmbmbm swab paw:
“coemsaocou pmbommeCD
\7
Umubmmnmï¬m
mHHMbOO Hosea "meb
Iosbbm mocmbcmm pmucmamm
bcmEmbem
ObbumEHHUIbbcm
ab Hoes: “cobeHmmmmxm
>x
a 9*... -—
.4
hbbeSbsm mm mawm
c..v-..- «a
-——- -
Axwv N mo m .m
¢ mo
MOOHQ mm Ombwmmo
xm “N mo mbmï¬ï¬sm
N No team .0
cObb
IMNHHMHOGOO
can Amv
lei
N mbbomm5m
n bass moame
ub>muuemam Ame
N m0
mocmcw>m
am new:
“GOHbMNH
lawnmcmw Amy
N mbHOQQSm
n bass moame
-He.--aaam lac
328
:mmmbpcb3 cam mmoom
IEOUGHS: "mmmsmcma acme
Ibmom mo mHmmem msob>wbm
Ob mocmummmb UHMHOOQm
a
cobbmoeammm cameommm
OHDbODHbm mocwbcwm
pmocmbmn ":Hbms mo MOOH:
"mambbxm mo mms immobmc<
cobbmbbommp m>bbmnbmz
mbmmn OHbMHOOEOO co
bcmeObmm mo COHbMONHQEH
.
abanosbsm mm beam.
mocmbmwmb HMSOmMOm
: m3 .-
- — "‘I# A;
b w
mo Om:
HH> bbommsm
Ob cobbbwmmm
tam N no a .n
HH>
mo bbom
Imam bum
IMHOCH bub
cobmmmbmbp
"cobbbmmmd ANV
m «o o lav
N can A mo m .m
e.
U m0 CObmb>bp
Ucm coebmcmmem .H
m m0 bcm
Ipcmmmp “coebbmmmd .U
N m0 0 .m
mmmoObm
wo.M nmeHmc< .N
mmmOOHQ
mo m “bomm
mo bamSmbmbm .H
cobbummmm
"HH> mo GObmb>bn .d
lemmeav
COflbDHOm «GOflflhmmmd .HH>
329
Hmom Ob Hammad
bDOHmDOHQb
poms OOOSOSMH HmcpoOEm
:mU:MHmH 0mm£B:
cpomeommp
UHMHUOQm mo mmsIIGOmemmEOU
:mm3 humm: bow
OHHmOO Ob Hammad
O>HbMHbmz
:03: MO @mD
mama so abauosbsa
mocmbmmmu HchmHOm
< mo O cum 0 n 4,.m
GOHmemm< .¢
SOHmDHOOOU
.Q
.U
HHH> mo OOGOUH>O mm
pmumumo “cpobmmm< .m
.N
e
cpobommm
msHm 4 HO O .H
GOmHHmmEOO an
pmbbommsm cpobmmmm .é
GOHbsHOm "cpoHmmmd .HHH>
N @cm H m0 m .m
Q m0 GOHmH>HQ .N
Q m0
cmHm “COHmH>HQ .H
HH> m0
conH>Hp “SOHbHOmmd .Q
330
GOmmmb Ob Hmmmmg
GOHmeDU HMUHHObmsm
OHmm mo Nubnonusa
OEMHQ
mo OUGOHODM mCHmSOxO
mcHCHm3 "cpobmmmd .0
m MO xm .N
H mo.m .n
cpoHmmm¢ .m
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF
LITERATURE CITED
(Note: Sources described within the text
of Chapter III are not included in this list.)
Books
Ausubel, Herman. The Late Victorians: A Short History.
New York: D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., 1955.
The B. B. C. Handbook, 1929. London: The British
Broadcasting Corporation, 1930.
Bentley, Eric. Bernard Shaw, 1856-1950. Amended ed.
New York: New Directions Books, 1957.
Chesterton, Gilbert K. George Bernard Shaw. Reprinted
ed. .New York: Hill and Wang, Inc., 1956.
Cole, Margaret Isabel (Postgate). The Story of Fabian
Socialism. Stanford, California: Stanford
University Press, 1961.
Dunbar, Janet. Mrs. G. B. 8.; a Portrait. New York:
Harper & Row, 1963.
Ervine, St. John Greer. Bernard Shaw: His Life, Work,
and Friends. New York: Morrow, 1956.
Goodwin, Michael (comp. and ed.). Nineteenth Century
Qpinion. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin
Books, 1951.
Henderson, Archibald. George Bernard Shaw: Man of the
Century. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts,
1956.
. Table-Talk of G. B. S. New York and London:
Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1925.
331
332
Irvine, William. The Universe of G. B. S. New York:
Whittlesey House, 1949.
Joad, Cyril Edwin Mitchinson. Shaw. London: Gollancz,
1949.
Kronenberger, Louis (ed.). George Bernard Shaw: A
Critical Survey. lst ed. Cleveland: World
Publishing Co., 1953.
Langer, William L. (comp. and ed.). An EncyclOpedia
of World History. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.,
1952.
Morris, May. William Morris: Artist, Writer, Socialist.
Vol. II. With an account of "William Morris As
I Knew Him" by Bernard Shaw. Oxford: Basil
Blackwell, 1936.
Nichols, Marie Hochmuth. Rhetoric and Criticism. Baton
Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1963.
Olivier, Sydney. Letters and Selected Writings. Edited
with a memoir by Margaret Olivier and "Some
Impressions" by Bernard Shaw. London: George
Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1948.
Patch, Blanche. Thirty Years With G. B. S. New York:
Dodd, Mead, 1951.
Pearson, Hesketh. G. B. S.: A Full-Length Portrait.
Garden City, New York: Garden City Publishing
Co., Inc., 1942.
. G. B. S., a Postscript. lst ed. New York:
Harper, 1950.
Pease, Edward Reynolds. The History of the Fabian Society.
With a new introduction by Margaret Cole. 3rd ed.
London: E. Cass, 1963.
Rattray, Robert F. Bernard Shaw: A Chronicle. New York:
Roy Publishers, 1951.
Rosset, B. C. Shaw of DublinZThe Formative Years.. Uni-
versity Park: The Pennsylvania State University
Press, 1964.
333
Shaw, Bernard. Advice to a Young Critic, and Other Letters.
Notes and introduction by E. J. West. New York:
Crown Publishers, 1955.
. The Complete Prefaces of Bernard Shaw. London:
Hamlyn, 1965.
. Essays in Fabian Socialism. London: Constable
and Company Limited, 1932, 1949.
. Florence FarrL Bernard Shaw, W. B. Yeatsy Letters.
Edited by Clifford Bax. London: Home & Van Thal
Ltd., 1946.
. How to Become a Musical Critic. Edited with
an introduction by Dan H. Laurence. New York:
Hill and Wang, 1961.
. The Intelligent Woman's Guide to Socialism and
Cgpitalism. New York: Brentano's Publishers, 1928.
. London Mpsic in 1888-89 As Heard by Corno di
Bassetto(Later Known As Bernard Shaw) with Some
Further Autobiographical Particulars. New York:
Dodd, Mead & Company, 1937.
. The Matter with Ireland. Edited with an intro-
duction by Dan H. Laurence and David H. Greene.
New York: Hill and Wang, 1962.
. On Langpage. Edited with an introduction and
notes by Abraham Tauber; foreword by James Pitman.
New York: PhilOSOphical Library, 1963.
. Our Theatre in the Nineties. 3 vols. London:
Constable and Company Limited, 1932.
. Platform and Pulpit. Edited with an introduction
by Dan H. Laurence. New York: Hill and Wange, 1961.
. Prefaces. London: Odhams Press Limited, 1938.
. The Qpintessence of G. B. S. Selected and with
an introduction by Stephen Winsten. New York:
Creative Age Press, 1949.
. The Religious Speeches of Bernard Shaw. Edited
by Warren Sylvester Smith; foreword by Arthur H.
334
Nethercot. University Park: The Pennsylvania
State University Press, 1963.
. Shaw on Theatre. Edited by E. J. West. New York:
Hill and Wang, 1958.
. Sixteen Self Sketches. New York: Dodd, Mead, &
Company, 1949.
. The Socialism of Shaw. Edited with an introduc-
tion by James Fuchs. New York: Vanguard Press, 1926.
St. John, Christopher (ed.). Ellen Terry and Bernard Shaw;
a Correspondence. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons,
1931.
Thorndike, Ashley H. (ed.). Modern Eloquence. Vol. XV. Rev.
ed. New York: P. F. Collier & Son Corporation,
1936.
Webb, Beatrice. Our Partnership. Edited by Barbara Drake
and Margaret I. Cole. London and New York: Longmans,
Green and Co., 1948.
Winsten, Stephen. Days With Bernard Shaw. New York:
Vanguard Press, 1949.
. (ed.). G. B. S. 90; Aspects of Bernard Shaw's Life
Work. New York: Dodd, Mead & Company, 1946.
Articles and Periodicals
"Extraordinary Shaw Collection of Dr. T. E. Hanley,"
The Shaw Bulletin, I (May, 1952), 12-13.
Henderson, Archibald. "Where Shaw Stands Today," The Shaw
Bulletin, I (Autumn, 1951), 1-6.
Shaw, Bernard. "Art Corner," Our Corner, VIII (September 1,
1886), 181-83.
"On Mr. Mallock's Proposed Trumpet Performance (a
Rejoinder)," Fortnightly Review, LV (April 1, 1894),
470-93.
. "A Symposium: What Mr. Gladstone Ought To Do,"
Fortnightly Review, LIII (February, 1893), 276-80.