How did Hitler, Goebbels, etc. learn public speaking?
I have a book - "The Hitler Years - a photographic documentary" by Ivor Matanle. It has a series of pictures of Hitler taken by Hoffmann in 1925 where Hitler was practicing poses and expressions while listening to a recording of himself on a gramophone. It says that after Hitler studied the pictures and decided what looked right he ordered Hoffmann to destroy the negatives, but he didn't.
- Helly Angel
- Member
- Posts: 5132
- Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 21:00
- Location: Florida, USA
Re: quien sabe?
"Personally, I believe that Goebbels was a natural speaker, in the meantime Hitler was a little more produced to say of the historians, nevertheless, independent of both situationes, I believe that boths had that rare quality to produce estupefaction in its audiences."Cosaco wrote:Personalmente, creo que Goebbels era un orador natural, en tanto Hitler era un tanto màs producido a decir de los historiadores, sin embargo, independiente de ambas sotuaciones, creo que abos tenìan esa rara cualidad de producir estupefacciòn en sus auditorios.
S.H.
Personally, I think you are wrongFubbik wrote:The Oxford Dictionary defines elocution as "mode, art of oral delivery". Using elocution is being eloquent. Personally, I believe Goebbels to be the better orator of the two.
I love Hitler's speaking. Goebbels sounded good, but no where near as good as Hitler, and Hitler looked cool doing it.
- GeneralSeydlitz
- Member
- Posts: 7
- Joined: 13 Dec 2004, 18:27
- Location: Palatina, Germany
-
- Member
- Posts: 3639
- Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 04:51
- Location: Malaysia
Hitler also learned the art of speaking from his mentor Dietrich Eckart..There are some comparison between the public speaking style of Hitler and Goebbels..
Hitler tend to express in terms of raw, emotional as well as violent gesticulation. His speeches were tend to reach into the audience's emotion and not reason. Therefore, the professor's mention of Hitler's style of public speaking is some sort of psycho-sexual relationship between him and the audiences. He started slowly and then proceed until the climax where the audiences mesmerised and himself were emotionally drain. The Nizkor Project where the OSS pyschological profile of the Fuhrer were published described very well the physio-pyscho conditional of the Fuhrer when he gave speeches..But according to John toland and Ian Kershaw of their biographies on Hitler, if the audience of Hitler's speech were intellectuals and the size of the audience were small, Hitler sometimes fumbled...He was not used being in the company of intellectuals whose reason are more superior to him
Goebbels, although he is not as raw and violently gesticulated like Hitler, tended to be more rhetoric and is brilliant with his manipulation style of words..In fact, in WW2, the most effective public speakers had to be Winston Churchill and Josef Goebbels..Churchill at time tended to be like Goebbels in terms of bravadura and rhetoric especially during the early years of war when England was threatened by invasion. nevertheless, the opposite happens when Germany was about to be defeated, the Goebbels speeches were laced with even more rhetoric just like Churchill in the early years of war..
But Goebbels certainly had an advantage over Churchill. While Churchill was the PM of England he did not have much control over the press unlike Goebbels who were the de facto cultural dictator of Germany
Hitler tend to express in terms of raw, emotional as well as violent gesticulation. His speeches were tend to reach into the audience's emotion and not reason. Therefore, the professor's mention of Hitler's style of public speaking is some sort of psycho-sexual relationship between him and the audiences. He started slowly and then proceed until the climax where the audiences mesmerised and himself were emotionally drain. The Nizkor Project where the OSS pyschological profile of the Fuhrer were published described very well the physio-pyscho conditional of the Fuhrer when he gave speeches..But according to John toland and Ian Kershaw of their biographies on Hitler, if the audience of Hitler's speech were intellectuals and the size of the audience were small, Hitler sometimes fumbled...He was not used being in the company of intellectuals whose reason are more superior to him
Goebbels, although he is not as raw and violently gesticulated like Hitler, tended to be more rhetoric and is brilliant with his manipulation style of words..In fact, in WW2, the most effective public speakers had to be Winston Churchill and Josef Goebbels..Churchill at time tended to be like Goebbels in terms of bravadura and rhetoric especially during the early years of war when England was threatened by invasion. nevertheless, the opposite happens when Germany was about to be defeated, the Goebbels speeches were laced with even more rhetoric just like Churchill in the early years of war..
But Goebbels certainly had an advantage over Churchill. While Churchill was the PM of England he did not have much control over the press unlike Goebbels who were the de facto cultural dictator of Germany
-
- Member
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: 17 Nov 2004, 00:17
- Location: Israel