Are conference talks good?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Maksutov
_Emeritus
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:19 pm

Re: Are conference talks good?

Post by _Maksutov »

Water Dog wrote:No, they are horrible. As much as I wish the opposite were true, they are awful as speech's go. They come across as very confident speakers, but they have a very obviously teleprompted and vain repetitious tone to them. This is why people fall asleep and after every conference people crack jokes about how each apostle reminds them of this or that. Many of the speakers, especially the women, also tend to be very patronizing and have a sappy primary-like tone and way about them when they speak. They put on an show of being super-spiritual but it is sickeningly fake and transparent. No real person talks like this. Very few of the talks are down to earth or at all feel real. At first viewing this may not be apparent however. After endless years of conference, it becomes quite repetitious. It's to the point for me that I literally can't listen to certain speakers. Even if for once it's actually a good talk from this person, their tone and style of speech is so predictable and comical that I can't take their message seriously. And I know plenty of TBMs who feel that way too. It would be nice, for once, just once, to see someone go off script and say things that were obviously off-the-cuff. You know, actually be guided by the spirit.

That said though a lot of the messages are very good. Very inspiring messages, some good stories, moral lessons, etc. And I usually can find at least one or two talks that I really liked. Usually the best talks come from the general authorities, someone I've never heard from. Sometimes the regular appearances surprise me. But honestly, are any of the messages more inspiring than someone like Joel Osteen? I've listened to some of his stuff that I actually thought was really good. He kept me engaged and the message was really good. The LDS speakers are generally horrible as keeping people engaged.

Never, ever, have I heard anything in conference that was powerful and inspiring at the level of great historical speeches that we could reference though. No dream speeches, not even a tear down this wall. It's scripted and generally lacks genuine passion. People will get teary-eyed, but in a sappy way, not a let's go to war way. I think people who tend to be emotional in their approach to faith will probably like the talks a lot better than I do. Honestly, the talks almost feel negative to me at times, like they are aimed at helping people generally maintain faith in things that are depressing. I know you're depressed, life is miserable, but persevere, keep the faith.


Dog, the fact that there are people like you in the church recognizing this means that it can still evolve and get better. It might be that the inspiration will need to come from the bottom up, too.
"God" is the original deus ex machina. --Maksutov
_Maksutov
_Emeritus
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:19 pm

Re: Are conference talks good?

Post by _Maksutov »

Gadianton wrote:By this, I do not mean, are conference talks a good source of information? I in fact, mean the very opposite: Are these talks moving and persuasive, independent of the quality of information? In other words, are they good examples of rhetoric? Are they good examples of crafted scripts and strong oration? Do they equal or surpass the works of other orators: presidents, congressmen, or other religious figures or community leaders?

I do not enjoy speeches of any kind and I never have. I do not even enjoy political speeches when they are somewhat or outright parodied in movies and TV shows that I like such as "24" or "House of Cards." I've always just assumed conference talks are "good" talks, and my lack of interest is a general problem with the genre itself. For instance, I don't like watching professional sports either, but I think I can tell the difference between the work of pro athletes and amateurs. I assumed gut instincts were same, more or less, of orators, in fact, I even took a public speaking class at BYU and did all right. My teacher was one of these squeaky clean guys who would have been intolerable if it weren't that he was so utterly true to squeaky cleanliness and I really liked the guy. Anyway, this teacher was a *huge* fan of Thomas S. Monson, Neal A. Maxwell, and the GAs generally, and considered them the grand masters of public speaking, with everything that implied, right down to crediting the persuasion with anything but the content. He had many stories about the care and practice the GA's put into their conference speeches as suggestions to us for practicing.

I've always just assumed that Monson and others are great speakers even though listening to them is torture for me. The contrary thought (that I recall) only occurred to me just the other day. I discovered "The Boss" on Netflix, with Kelsey grammar, and grammar's speech in the first episode was off the charts. Had his character been a GA I may have been defrauded for a longer time. The show overall is a step down from House of Cards, and Spacey's character is just as good, but, in the particular matter of speech writing and delivery, whoever came up with that speech along with grammar's execution sets the gold standard. It's probably, in fact, good evidence that Church leaders are not inspired.

Anyway, now I'm asking you all, how do the Church leaders rate as speech writers and orators?


It's difficult for me to say because I always view speeches very critically, as I do marketing. I assume that I will not be told the whole truth, that it will be a more or less blatant exercise in propaganda. I spent over thirty years working for the federal government, in both military and civilian agencies, and my attitude is the result.
"God" is the original deus ex machina. --Maksutov
_consiglieri
_Emeritus
Posts: 6186
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:47 pm

Re: Are conference talks good?

Post by _consiglieri »

If by "good" you mean, are they worth listening to or viewing, the answer for me is NO!

If by "good" you mean is it like self-flagellation to listen or view, then the answer is YES!

If by "good" you mean anything is said that is worth spending time listening to, then the answer is NO!



I agree that Paul Dunn was a good speaker.

There was also a talk given back in the 80's by a guy named Elder Wells, that I thought was memorable.

That's pretty few and far between.

Also, I have to mention LeGrande Richards. I always looked forward to hearing him speak.

There is something to be said for enthusiasm.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri
You prove yourself of the devil and anti-mormon every word you utter, because only the devil perverts facts to make their case.--ldsfaqs (6-24-13)
_kairos
_Emeritus
Posts: 1917
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Are conference talks good?

Post by _kairos »

Conference talks are quite good- heavily ghost written by professionals and tested in small secret focus groups- there can be no margin for error with the faithful nor can there be any question that the content does not align with correlated "doctrine" or policy etc. the problem is that the "12" want to put their two cents in up until the last minute, eg an apostle may want to tell that wwII story again, ala TSM.
i wonder how alarmed the women are who speak, and are told/given a timeline to have their draft notes into a Bonneville Communications which will then control the writing /editing and then carryout the test pulpit runs with the poor woman. i would love to hear the relief society president bitch to her husband about how "they" are controlling her talk.

let the truth be known!

just sayin
k
_sunstoned
_Emeritus
Posts: 1670
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:12 am

Re: Are conference talks good?

Post by _sunstoned »

Good conference talks are few and far between. I remember one that was given in 1984 by Elder Poelman that I found particularly inspiring. At least the original version was.
_consiglieri
_Emeritus
Posts: 6186
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:47 pm

Re: Are conference talks good?

Post by _consiglieri »

I am finally getting around to reading 1984 by George Orwell and wonder if this could have been planned any better.

Down the memory hole, indeed.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri
You prove yourself of the devil and anti-mormon every word you utter, because only the devil perverts facts to make their case.--ldsfaqs (6-24-13)
_fetchface
_Emeritus
Posts: 1526
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2014 5:38 pm

Re: Are conference talks good?

Post by _fetchface »

And ironically done in the year 1984. You just can't make this stuff up.
Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas
My Blog: http://untanglingmybrain.blogspot.com/
_Bazooka
_Emeritus
Posts: 10719
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:36 am

Re: Are conference talks good?

Post by _Bazooka »

One can tell how bland the most recent Conference talks were because we don't have a current thread discussing any specific one.
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
_Bazooka
_Emeritus
Posts: 10719
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:36 am

Re: Are conference talks good?

Post by _Bazooka »

fetchface wrote:And ironically done in the year 1984. You just can't make this stuff up.


Let me try apologetic spin....

God inspired George Orwell to write the novel knowing that Michael Radford would have the film version out in time for when He knew Poelman was going to misspeak at Conference so that all the members would understand why it was re-orated and so provide further evidence that the Church is true.
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
Post Reply