From his former role as the New York Times drama critic to his current role as one of their leading political columnists, Frank Rich has long impressed and even inspired me with his depth of knowledge and points of view. In his most recent column, however, he took a point of view about my field -- public speaking -- with which I must respectfully disagree.
Writing about Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal's broadly derided speech, (please see yesterday's post on the subject) Mr. Rich said, "The morning-after conservative rationalization of Jindal's flop was that his adenoidal delivery, not his words, did him in, and that media coaching could banish his resemblance to Kenneth the Page of 30 Rock. That's denial. For Jindal no less than Obama, form followed content."
Then, later in the same column, discussing Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner's similarly-criticized speech, Mr. Rich extended his form follows content point, "Like the Louisiana governor, the Treasury secretary is a weak public speaker not because he lacks brains or vocal training but because his message doesn't fly."
If one accepts that point of view, then one would accept the corollary that, if Jindal's content had had more substance -- say like Newt Gingrich's 1994 "Contract with America" which cost Bill Clinton his congressional majority -- Jindal's delivery would have been less "smug and jejune," as Mr. Rich described it. Or that, if Geithner had come up with an economic plan that had the clarity and specificity of General Schwarzkopf's Desert Storm operation, his dour, flatline delivery would have been more like that of Barack Obama's power presentation of the same serious matter. (Please see tomorrow's post on that subject.)
As evidence to the contrary, what if Sarah Palin, whose content is more often than not as specious as was Jindal's, or as snarky as she usually is, had delivered the identical text Jindal did, but did it with her trademark perky cheerleader style? Of course, any thinking adult and every Democrat would have objected just as vehemently, but odds are, the Republicans would not have had to scramble as hard to defend the criticism.
The point of view here, if I may, Mr. Rich, is that form does not follow content, they are of equal weight. Bobby Jindal did sound like Kenneth the Page and that exposed and exacerbated the flaws in his message. While what you say is important, how you say it every bit as important, and both require equal diligence and skill.
As another Frank, Mister Sinatra, once sang about love and marriage, "You can't have one without the other."