Female Orators by Joseph Addison-Qs-Ans.

 

Female Orators by Joseph Addison –Qs-Ans.

 

Q1. What suggestion does the essayist give to the universities?

Ans. The essayist humorously suggests that universities should appoint women as professors of rhetoric.

 

Q2. Why does Addison suggest that universities should fill their rhetoric chairs with she-professors only?

Ans. Addison believes women are more skilled in speaking than men. Even Socrates, a great speaker, was taught by a woman named Aspasia. Addison jokingly says that women are naturally good at rhetoric, so they should teach it in universities.

 

Q3. How are women orators different from male orators, according to Addison? What example does he give?

Ans. Addison says that men can talk for hours about something important, while women can talk for hours about nothing. He gives an example of a woman who made a long speech about the border of a petticoat and scolded her servant with fancy words for breaking a china cup.

 

Q4. What does Addison say about women's way of speaking, comparing it to a fish-market?

Ans. Addison jokingly says that women should be allowed to argue in court because they are very good at speaking. To hear their real talent, one should visit a fish-market where women argue loudly and passionately. This is meant to be a funny remark.

 

Q5. What does Addison mean when he says some men can talk for hours on anything, but women can talk for hours on nothing?

Ans. Addison says that while men are praised for speaking on various topics for a long time, women can talk endlessly even when there's nothing important to say. He is making a joke that women's talk often lacks meaning.

 

Q6. What does Addison tell us about an old lady in this chapter?

                                       Or

 How does Addison make fun of women for their non-stop talking?

Ans. Addison tells a story about an old lady who kept talking about one unhappy marriage for a whole month. In one place she blamed the bride, in another she felt sorry for her, in another she laughed at her, and so on. This shows how women, according to Addison, talk too much about small things.

 

Q7. Who are the first kind of female orators?

Ans. The first kind of women speakers are those who know how to stir up emotions. Socrates' wife might have been very good at this type of speaking.

 

Q8. Who are the second type of female orators?

Ans. The second type of women speakers are good at insulting and mocking others. They have a sharp imagination and can tell the same story in many different ways.

 

Q9. What name is given to the third type of female orators?

Ans. The third type of women are called gossips. These women love to know and talk about everything happening around them in their neighbourhood.

 

Q10. What does Addison call the fourth kind of female orators?

Ans. Addison calls them coquettes. These women are talkative and act in a flirtatious way. They complain a lot, act overly emotional, and always seem unhappy. Writers like Hudibras and Ovid made fun of such women by saying that their tongues never rest, not even when they are asleep or even cut off!

 Long Answer-type Questions:

Q. 1. What does Addison call the fourth kind of female orators?
Ans. He gives them the name of coquettes. Besides being very talkative, such women are coquettish also. They would hate and love someone in the same breath. They would make an excessive show of their love for their pet dog or parrot. They feel uncomfortable in any kind of weather and in every part of the room. They have imaginary complaints against all men whom they know. They sigh when they are not sad. They laugh when they are not cheerful.

Hudibras has given an interesting reason why women can talk on trifles with the greatest fluency. He is of the opinion that their tongue is like a race-horse. It runs the faster the lesser weight it carries. An Irishman told a woman that her tongue must be glad when she was asleep, for it had no rest while she was awake. In a ballad, Ovid tells of a woman whose tongue was cut out and thrown on the ground. Still it went on murmuring. However, Addison is not very sure which of these reasons is the most probable.

Q. 3. How does Addison classify female orators? What are their special qualities? Or
What are Addison's views about

(1) Socrates' wife,

(2) about female orators who are censorious,

(3) about female orators who indulge in gossips, and

(4) about the coquette ?

Ans. Addison puts female orators into four different groups. The first of these is busy in stirring up the passions. The wife of Socrates belonged to this group. Addison humorously remarks that she was even more skilled in this art than Aspasia, the woman who had instructed Socrates in the art of eloquence.

The second kind of female orators deal in invectives. They are censorious by nature. They have a wonderful imagination. They have an eye on every little slip in the behaviour of another. Then they use their own imagination to enlarge upon it. They go about telling their stories at different places. They censure a man at his back and praise him at his face. Addison tells of a woman belonging to this kind. She once made an unhappy marriage the subject of a month's conversation. She blamed the bride at one place, pitied her in another, laughed at her in a third, wondered at her in a fourth and was angry with her in the fifth. At last she went to the married pair and praised the bride for her very good choice. She expressed her desire that people should have known how happy the husband and wife were.

The third kind of female orators can be called gossips. They make up false stories and tell them everywhere. Addison describes a woman who belonged to this group. She was Mrs. Fiddle Faddle. She was a gossip. She was skilled in this sort of eloquence. She concocted false stories and went about telling them to others. She related every detail of the christenings she had never attended. She knew every dish served in the neighbourhood. She would entertain her friends by telling them about the wit of her little son. But Addison satirically adds that Mrs. Fiddle Faddle's little son was not yet able to speak.

The coquette is the fourth kind of female orator. The only purpose of her talk is to display her graces. She hates and loves in the same breath. She talks to her lap-dog or parrot. She sighs when she is not sad. She laughs when she is not happy. She is uneasy in every corner of the room, and in every weather. She can't speak a word without moving her limbs or eyes.

These are the four different kinds of female orators described by Addison in his essay. But the description is satirical. It is meant to laugh at women out of their garrulity

Q2. Bring out the elements of humour and satire in Addison's essay, Female Orators.
                                           Or
How do women outshine men in talking? Base your answer on Addison's essay, Female Orators

Ans. Addison's ‘Female Orators' is a satire on the garrulity of women. But the satire is very light. It is not biting at all. It is all pure humour.

Many men were great orators. They have been praised for their eloquence. But Addison says that such honour is due to some women also. It is true that some men could talk for hours upon anything. But there are some women who can talk for hours upon nothing. Then who is the greater orator? The satire is indeed obvious.

Socrates was a great orator. But even he was trained in eloquence by a woman. So Addison thinks that this art is more proper to the female sex. He humorously remarks that the universities should fill the rhetoric chairs with she-professors only. He says that if anybody has any suspicion about the talent of woman, he should visit the women in a fish-market.

He also gives the example of a woman, who once made an unhappy marriage the subject of a month's conversation. She blamed the bride at one place, pitied her at another, laughed at her in a third, wondered at her in a fourth and was angry with her in the fifth. At last she went to the married pair and praised the bride for her very good choice. Then there was Mrs. Fiddle Faddle whose little child was not yet able to speak. But she would entertain her friends by telling them stories of her child's wit.

Addison wonders why women have this talent of eloquence better than men. He thinks perhaps women lack retentive power. They are compelled to speak out everything that they think. Addison is not certain if this is the real reason. There are some women who are very cunning and never let others know what is in their heart. Some people think that the tongue is like a race-horse which runs the faster the lesser weight it carries. The point of satire is very obvious here also.

Thus we see that the whole satire in this essay centres on the garrulity of women. But the satire is everywhere very light-hearted.

Female Orators by Joseph Addison -SUMMARY

                         Female Orators by Joseph Addison

                            SUMMARY

               Females Better Orators Than Men

      Socrates was supposed to have been taught eloquence (expressiveness) by a female teacher. This went to prove that females are better suited for the art of oratory than men. Addison feels that women should occupy the chairs for rhetoric in universities. Men have been praised for being able to talk for hours upon any subject but females are better because they can talk for hours upon nothing. If females were allowed to plead in the courts of law, they would be able to do better than males. As proof, one can see the fish wives who are able to argue so well.

 

Types of Female Speakers

Female speakers can be categorized into four types: those who stir emotions, those who criticize, those who gossip, and those who flirt.

 

The Passionate Speaker – These women know how to evoke strong emotions in others. Socrates’ wife was an example of this type.

 

The Critical Speaker – These women love to find fault in others and enjoy telling multiple versions of the same story. One woman, for instance, discussed an unhappy marriage for an entire month, presenting it with pity, anger, amusement, or criticism, depending on her audience. Later, she told the bride that malicious (mean) people were spreading unfair gossip. Their praise and criticism are not sincere but simply ways to keep conversations going.

 

The Gossip – These women talk at length about minor details. They can describe a lady’s hairstyle, a christening (baptism-naming ceremony), or the dishes served at a dinner party with great precision. They even discuss the wit of a baby who has not yet learned to speak.

 

The Flirt – These women switch between love and hatred just to have something to talk about. They sigh and laugh for no reason, creating unnecessary conflicts with men to keep conversations interesting. Their speech seems less about words and more about using gestures and expressions to attract attention.

Types of Female Orators

      There are a number of types of female orators. They can be classified, as those who stir up the passions, those who are censorious, those who are gossips, and those who are coquettes.

The first type was the one that aroused the passion. An example of this type was Socrates’s wife.

 

The second type indulged in all kinds of invective known as the censorious orators; they were possessed of fertile imagination and power of invention. They could be most eloquent upon the faults of other women. They were able to tell different versions of the same story. There was a woman who made an unhappy marriage the subject of conversation for a month. She showed pity, anger, amusement, and other different reactions to the same bride in her different versions at several places. Then she went to the bride herself, complimented her upon her choice of husband and told her that malicious people were criticizing her unreasonably. Women of this type could not be taken seriously for their blame or praise was merely a device to keep the conversation going.

      The third type was the gossip. This type could describe in a great detail the most trivial of things. Women belonging to this category could describe a lady’s head-dress or about a christening. They knew all about each and every dish served in the neighborhood. They could describe the wit of a small child as yet unable to speak.

 

The fourth type was the coquette. This type loves and hates in the same breath so as to give herself more scope for conversation. She sighs and laughs without cause. She invents quarrels and obligations with all the men she knows so as to have opportunities to talk with them. She seems to speak mainly to get a chance to use her limbs in the different movements.

Cause of Female Oratory

      It has been a puzzle to the writer to assign a cause to this superiority of oratory in females. Perhaps it is because they do not have the power of retaining their thoughts that they keep talking. But this theory has an objection because it has been known that women are quite capable of dissembling and hiding their thoughts. Thus this theory is not quite satisfactory. Another theory is that there might be certain anatomical features about the female tongue which Makes it very talkative. He has asked a friend to dissect a woman’s tongue in order to find out whether it has some special juices that render it more talkative or if it has some channels connected to the brain and heart which keeps up a constant supply of animal spirits to the tongue. Perhaps it has some special muscles which keep it moving quickly. He does not ignore the comment of Hudibras that tongues are like race horses; those that have less, weight run faster.

Constant Movement of the Tongue

      The tongue of a woman gets rest only when she sleeps. An old story calls the woman’s tongue an aspen leaf which keeps shaking. Ovid speaks of a woman whose tongue, after being cut off, continues to speak. The writer is quite fond of the music that is created by this little instrument, namely the female tongue. His paper was aimed at making that little instrument harmonious and free of the disharmonious notes of anger, censoriousness, gossip and coquetry. He wanted the female tongue to be tuned by truth, good nature, discretion and sincerity.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS

      The essay, Female Orators is a satire on the talkativeness of women. Addison exposes the foible of women who talk incessantly upon trivial matters in an amusing manner. The essay is a good example of the technique of irony that was typical of Addison. He is satiric and ironic, and yet, never bitterly so. He is not cynical and indecent in any part of the essay. He is always elegant and his satire and irony are gentle. It is the type of humour that makes one laugh but it does not hurt anyone. There is a grave irony in his comments regarding the suitability of women for the chairs of rhetoric in the universities.

 

There is masterly irony in his sly equation of the lawyers’ arguments in courts and the abusive bargaining of the fish wives. The effect is increased by the learned references he makes to Hudibras, Ovid, Descartes. The ironic effect is enhanced by his seriousness of approach to the inquiry into the cause of the volubility of the female tongue. It is Addison’s method of satire to talk gravely upon a subject which cannot but give rise to laughter. The ironical style is sustained through the essay, or really, nearly up till the end. For, at the end Addison’s moral nature intrudes and makes him declare that he meant to give wholesome advice to his female readers by exposing the foible, their tongues were subject to. This is in keeping with the aim of the Spectator. The end tries to take away the sting of the satire. The essay is enlivened and color is added to it through the help of illustrations or imaginary examples and anecdotes. The essay exhibits the aim of the Spectator which was to entertain while instructing.

 

Female Orators

It is believed that Socrates learned eloquence from a female teacher, which suggests that women might be better at public speaking than men. Addison argues that women should be appointed professors teaching rhetoric in universities. Men are often praised for their ability to speak on any topic for hours, but women are even better because they can talk endlessly about nothing at all. If women were allowed to argue in court, they might outperform men. A good example of their natural talent can be seen in fishwives (women known for loud, argumentative, and sometimes coarse speech. In Addison’s essay, fishwives are used as an example of women who naturally excel in argumentation, implying that their skill in bargaining and debating at the marketplace could rival that of lawyers in court.), who excel at arguing and bargaining.

 

Types of Female Speakers

Female speakers can be categorized into four types: those who stir emotions, those who criticize, those who gossip, and those who flirt.

 

The Passionate Speaker – These women know how to evoke strong emotions in others. Socrates’ wife was an example of this type.

 

The Critical Speaker – These women love to find fault in others and enjoy telling multiple versions of the same story. One woman, for instance, discussed an unhappy marriage for an entire month, presenting it with pity, anger, amusement, or criticism, depending on her audience. Later, she told the bride that malicious (mean) people were spreading unfair gossip. Their praise and criticism are not sincere but simply ways to keep conversations going.

 

The Gossip – These women talk at length about minor details. They can describe a lady’s hairstyle, a christening (baptism-naming ceremony), or the dishes served at a dinner party with great precision. They even discuss the wit of a baby who has not yet learned to speak.

 

The Flirt – These women switch between love and hatred just to have something to talk about. They sigh and laugh for no reason, creating unnecessary conflicts with men to keep conversations interesting. Their speech seems less about words and more about using gestures and expressions to attract attention.

 

The Cause of Female Eloquence

The author wonders why women seem to be superior speakers. One theory is that they lack the ability to keep thoughts to themselves, forcing them to express everything aloud. However, this idea is flawed, as women are also skilled at concealing their true feelings.

Another theory suggests that there may be something unique about a woman’s tongue that makes it more active. The author even asks a friend to examine a woman’s tongue to see if it has special fluids or muscles that keep it in constant motion. He also refers to the idea that lighter things move faster, just like racehorses—perhaps a woman's tongue is simply designed for speed.

 

The Constant Motion of the Female Tongue

A woman’s tongue only rests when she is asleep. An old story compares it to an aspen leaf that never stops trembling. Ovid once wrote about a woman whose tongue continued to speak even after being cut off. The writer enjoys the sound of women talking but hopes they will refine their speech. He wishes for their words to be free from anger, harsh criticism, gossip, and meaningless chatter. Instead, he wants them to speak with truth, kindness, wisdom, and sincerity.

 

Critical Analysis

The essay Female Orators is a satire on women’s talkativeness. Addison humorously highlights their endless chatter and skill in discussing trivial matters. His tone remains lighthearted and never turns cruel or offensive. His satire is elegant, filled with irony that makes the reader smile rather than feel insulted. For instance, he jokingly suggests that women should hold university positions in rhetoric, implying that their natural ability to speak surpasses that of men. He also compares the legal arguments of male lawyers to the loud bargaining of fishwives, reinforcing his playful critique.

 

Addison enhances the humor by referencing well-known figures like Hudibras, Ovid, and Descartes, which makes his argument sound serious while remaining amusing. His approach is to discuss a trivial topic in a grave manner, creating irony. The essay remains satirical throughout, but towards the end, Addison softens his tone. He claims that his true purpose is to give women good advice—to help them refine their speech rather than silence them. This aligns with The Spectator’s goal of entertaining while offering moral guidance. The essay’s lively style, filled with examples and anecdotes, makes it an enjoyable read while subtly delivering its message.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LINE BY LINE PARAPHRASE

      Line. 8-14. It has been said.......figures of rhetoric: Addison criticizes the volubility of females in this essay. He says in a sarcastic tanner that some men were able to talk upon any subject for hours together but women did not need any subject. Women could talk forever upon nothing. As an example to prove this point, he says that he knew a woman who could elaborate upon a subject in a most spontaneous manner. She could speak for a long time upon such topics as the border of a petticoat. She could scold her servant for having broken a cup made of china clay in the most picturesque and rhetorical (impressive) language, using all kinds of similes and metaphors and other figures of speech!

 

The passage is humorous and ironical. He satirizes the ability of women to speak elaborately, and for hours, upon trivial topics. He achieves the satiric effect by using high-sounding terms for the objects he intends to make fun of.

Line. 15-19. Were women permitted......British fishery:

 

Addison satirizes the volubility of women. He says that women talk upon nothing for hours. Their power of eloquence and argumentation goes to show that they would do better as lawyers in the courts than the men, if they were only allowed to practice law. This is all the more easy to believe if one sees the ability of the fish wives or the women who sell fish in Britain. They are able to argue effectively and abusively to win their cases. These fish wives could use the crudest language and are great at quarreling and arguing to bring about their transactions. This, says Addison, proves the potential ability of women to become good; lawyers. The passage is satirical and ironical. The humour once again comes from the disparity between the serious manner of writing the comic intention. He uses high sounding terms such as ladies of the British fisheries for the low-class women who sell fish thereby heightening the humour. It is humorous that he holds the quarrelsome ability of the fishwives as proof of his contention that women would make good lawyers. The irony is most effective through its very gravity.

      Line. 26-30. The imagination......the same story: In this essay, Addison ridicules the volubility of women. In the most ironical manner, he describes the great ability of women to talk eloquently. He divides the female orators into a number of types. In this passage, he describes the group which indulges in invective and fault-finding. He admires their power of eloquence and imagination. They have a remarkable inventiveness of mind and grasp over the effective use of language. They possess a great skill for elaborating upon the smallest mistake another woman makes or the most trivial fault she has. They use their skill to disparage another woman. These female orators have the power of telling stories about other women and what was most wonderful was that each time the story was repeated it assumed a slightly different color and was told with the help of different figures of speech. Addison has managed irony with a consummate skill in this essay and of which this passage is an example. He uses the ironic technique of the praise-blame inversion. Using rhetorical terms, he seems to praise the women’s skill at making up the malicious stories in disparagement of other women while, in reality, he is ridiculing and satirizing them.

      Line. 30-40. I have known......better acquainted: Addison satirizes the volubility of women. He divides the female orators into a number of groups, one of which is the group that indulges in invective and fault-finding. He gives an illustration of this kind in this passage. An old lady who exemplified this category went about talking upon one subject, namely a newly married couple in the most colorful and imaginative terms. She talked about it for a whole month, varying her attitude and the description every time she talked about it. She criticized the bride at one place. At another, she expressed sympathy for her. Yet another occasion saw her making amusing remarks about the bride’s choice of her husband. She exhausted a pair of coach-horses by going around from place to place expressing her anxiety about the bride. She at last exhausted her inventive power and ability to speak against the marriage. Then, she went to the bride herself and praised and congratulated her upon having chosen well in her husband. She also told her how malicious people were going around saying all kinds of mean and spiteful and unjust things about her marriage. She expressed the wish to become a close friend of the bride. Addison’s satire is effective in this passage, as it is evident. He uses irony to great effect. His grave and serious tone enhance the satire.

      Line. 43-49. Mrs. Fiddle-Faddle is.....able to speak: Addison divides the female orators into different classes. One of these classes he calls the gossips. Mrs. Fiddle-Faddle is an example of this type. The name is most suitable and this, incidentally, is one of the devices of Addison—to give an illustration to make his point clear. This lady has achieved a great proficiency at this skill of gossiping. She can speak at great length describing the christening parties. She can criticize with devastating effect, the various head-dresses put on by the fashionable women. She knows everything that happens in the neighborhood, all the small and trivial details about it. She can spend a whole afternoon telling about the wit of her little boy who can not yet speak! The irony of the passage is unmistakable. We see how skilfully Addison sustains the tone of gravity and, by this means, enhances the ironic effect. He uses the language of praise to speak of Mrs. Fiddle-Faddle’s accomplishment of gossiping, thereby bringing about ridicule. The irony of the last sentence of the passage is self-evident. A gossip like this lady finds no difficulty in talking about the wit of a child who has not yet learnt to speak.

      Line. 65-70. I have sometimes fancied......always thinks: Addison satirizes the volubility and eloquence of women in this essay. Here he sets about scientifically analyzing the reasons for this loquacity in women. It is this serious tone which increases the satiric and ironic effect. He wonders why women have a greater ability to speak more fluently than men. He says that it could become men have greater power of controlling and putting a check upon their thoughts hence they do not speak so much. Women, the other hand, lack the power of keeping back what they think in their minds; they have to express whatever they think. As women talk all the time, it is implied that they think all the time too. The fact that they go on talking and, hence, thinking, proves the theory put forward by Descartes that the soul thinks and therefore it exists. This is a sly remark on the part of Addison. By quoting learned theories in such a serious tone he manages to satirize the women talkers.

      Line. 73-83. In order to......animal spirits: In this essay, Addison ridicules the loquacity of women. In a manner typically his own, Addison satirizes the oratory of females. He seeks to find the cause of this volubility in a serious and scientific manner and this adds to the irony. He has asked his friend who has studied the structure of the human body and dissects to find out more about the, internal structure of the body, to dissect the tongue of a female. This might, he says, lead them to know if the tongue has certain special liquids or fluids which gave the possessor of such a tongue the ability to speak ceaselessly. Perhaps the tongue had certain muscles made up of very flexible and thinner threads which made it move restlessly. Or, perhaps, there were certain muscles in the tongue of a female which made the tongue move up and down in sudden and quick movement. Lastly, there might be some connection, as yet undiscovered, between the tongue and the heart and head which keeps up a constant supply of liveliness to the tongue. The language used by Addison, is serious and grave and the manner of instituting a scientific inquiry into the construction of the female tongue is equally grave. This adds to the ironic and satiric effect of the whole passage. The ironic is made elegant and devastating with the use of those elevated terms for the female tongue, such as, “little instrument of loquacity”.

      Line. 96-99. Ovid......posture: Addison enhances the satire and irony of the passage by referring to these great authors of the past. He had referred to Hudibras in the earlier paragraph, the herd of a mock-epic written by Samuel Butler. Now, in the most serious manner, he refers to Ovid, the great classical Latin poet who had written Metamorphoses. In that work he had described the rape of Philomela. After the rape her seducer, Tereus, cut off her tongue: The cut off tongue continued to mutter something even in that condition. Addison quotes this passage from Ovid to lend support to his argument that the female tongue has something special in it that makes it so voluble. Addison’s natural gentleness and civilized mind cannot help saying, however, that, though the description given by Ovid is an apt illustration of the loquacity of the female tongue, it is a description of a “very barbarous circumstance”. He uses these learned references to satirize the women’s volubility effectively. He seems to praise; he seems to be talking very gravely, but the intent and result is satire.

      Line. 83-86. Nor must I......it carries: In this essay Addison sets about in a most serious manner to find out the true cause for the loquacity of women. Here, he refers to the hero of Samuel Butler’s satirical poem, Hudibras. Addison feels that he must not leave out what Hudibras says about people who talk a great deal upon unimportant matters. He said that tongues were like race horses. The race horse is able to run fast if the person riding it is light. Similarly, the tongue can move fast and tirelessly if the matter it is talking about, is weightless or unimportant. Thus a man who has not much weighty thought, would speak fast and fluently whereas a person who thinks and has some intelligent matter in his head would not be able to speak so fluently. Addison means to convey the point that women talk a great deal because they talk upon most trivial and unimportant things. He uses learned references in a serious manner to enhance the ironic and satiric effect.

      Line. 117-122. All that I aim......discretion, and sincerity: Addison satirizes the tendency of females to speak a great deal upon nothing. The satire and irony is masterly. But in this concluding paragraph the “moral” of Addison comes to the fore. The didactic purpose behind the essay is presented. He ridiculed the loquacity of the female tongue, not in order to cease its flow completely, but to improve its quality. He compares the tongue to a musical instrument which, at the present, was harsh and unharmonious in its notes sometimes because of anger, tendency to find fault or gossip or flirt. He wanted these unharmonious aspects of the tongue to be removed and the tongue tuned like a good musical instrument. The tuning should be accomplished if the speaker went according to goodness of nature, truth, good judgment and sincerity. Then the tongue would produce the pleasant sounds and the good speech.

 

Great Books Born out of Great Minds by Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam

 Great Books Born out of Great Minds by Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam

About the Author

Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam’s full name is Avul Pakir Jainulabdeen Abdul Kalam. He was the recipient of the prestigious award ‘Bharat Ratna’. He was the eleventh President of India. He was born and brought up in Rameshwaram in Tamil Naidu. Before becoming the President of India, he worked as an aerospace engineer with Defence Reseach and Development Organisation (DRDO and Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) He is popularly known as the ‘Missile Man of India’.

About the Essay

This essay has been taken from his speech delivered on Dec 07, 2013 at Lucknow Literature Carnival. The speech is highly motivating and inspirational for young authors and budding writers.

By A. P. J. Abdul Kalam

Dr. Abdul Kalam begins this essay by addressing the readers as ‘Friends’. He explains the importance of reading in life. He advises the readers that they should develop reading habit from the very young age. It enables them acquire knowledge through books. It further makes human beings appreciate multiple aspects of human life. In this way they all will develop a regular reading habit.

Culture of Excellence

After that, the author proceeds to explain culture of excellence. He says that excellence in culture cannot be achieved all of a sudden. It is a continuous process. People make continuous efforts to better themselves.

 First they set their performance standards and focus on their work to mature their dreams. They also remain prepared to take calculated risks. Sometimes they face failures in life, but failures do not deter them from achieving their goals. They strive to work according to their potential. The author calls it unending life-cycle phenomena. People should know that they are not in competition with anyone else, but they are in competition with themselves to achieve the culture of excellence.

 

The Author Inside

Now, the author proceeds to explain that every individual has an author inside. Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam says that he has met 16 million young men so far. While interacting with them, he has found that it was an experience as if he lived in the world of stories. The author says that everything is a story for children. They want to become astronauts, pilots, soldiers, doctors, sailors, and so on. They live in their beautiful make-believe world of fantasies. As they grow up, after watching films, plays and reading novels, they add some more fantasies to their make-believe world. The author says that even sporting events and criminal trials also open up stories for them.

The author says that, after living for 82 years, he realized that he was also living a story. He justifies it by adding that they all are giving words to their ideas and everyday events. At the same time, they are adding something to their reality by their imagination to make it more beautiful.

The author says that stories are very helpful for all of us to understand life and also to solve its complex problems. Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam quotes an example of flight simulators. They prepare pilots for difficult situations.

Imagination plays a very important role in story-telling. It helps people to teleport mentally into alternative worlds. Imagination provides us with magical power to experience what we do not actually express in real life. Imagination is a tool with measurable utility rather than an object for aesthetic admiration. “Attention is the reward that listener bestow on the story teller.”

After that the author says that story-telling has a darker side also.

“It makes us vulnerable to conspiracy theories, advertisements and narratives about ourselves that are more ‘truly’ than true. Everything is in the eye of the beholder. Right, wrong, sin, good, duty, responsibility, love, hate—all of these depend on who is looking. New forms of stories generate their own new sets of problems which require yet more solutions. Alternate Reality Games (ARG) are interactive networked narratives that use the real world as a platform and uses trans-media story telling o deliver  a story that may be altered by participants’ ideas or actions. The author again lays emphasis on the fact that story telling should be taken seriously and they should remain authentic human experiences.

The author further talks o great minds of the past. They wrote great books. Goethe wrote Faust, the great German epic. Shakespeare wrote great plays in which he could see the past, the present and the future. The great epic master Valmiki wrote the story of the Ramayna that also stands for the past, the present and the future. The author read from the biographies of Goethe and Shakespeare that they were able to write such great books because their minds were inspired by the Life Force. They claim that every human being has intellectual energy. Very few people utilse their inspiration. Usually it gets lost and diluted with the passage of time. Mehrishi  Valmiki says that a divine force helped him to write the Ramayana. Finally the author gives a message, particularly, to the young authors, “You have the mighty force within you: assemble it, concentrate and use it for imagination and create great worlds.”