I’m reading a wonderful book called The Lost Art of the Great Speech: How to Write One, How to Deliver It, by Richard Dowis, an award-winning speechwriter and retired senior vice president of Manning, Selvage and Lee.

The book is chock full of great writing tips and world-class speeches by everyone from Washington, Lincoln, Churchill and Roosevelt to JFK, Jesse Jackson, Nelson Mandela and Mario Cuomo…with some female representation from Rep. Barbara Jordan, Margaret Thatcher and former UN Ambassador Jeanne Kirkpatrick.  

One of the excellent chapters is on editing the speech. Dowis quotes former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan, who says this about being edited, “A speech is a fondue pot, and everyone has a fork. And I mean everyone.”

Dowis adds, “If you’re a speechwriter working in a corporate or government environment, you’ll have plenty of ‘editors’ – probably more than you want or need. Everyone, it seems, is a frustrated writer and cannot resist the impulse to edit someone else’s hard work.”
 
He’s right, of course, but having said that, all writers need editing.  

One of the best editors I ever had was the manager of the speechwriters’ group I was part of at a telecommunications company back in New Haven, Connecticut. It was my first real speechwriting job. 

After reviewing the speech, my manger would come to my desk, script in hand, and begin a conversation that went something like this. “I really like this speech, but I’d like to draw your attention to a few areas you might like to think about.”

He’d proceed to walk me through the speech, stopping at those spots he thought needed a little more reflection. He’d say, “Is this quite the right word to use to describe this? What do you think the audience will think when they hear this?”

He was so insightful and kind about his reviews and edits, I most often agreed with him and went on to make changes that strengthened the speech.

His supervisor in our department, who also reviewed our speeches, was also gentle in her edits. She would send the speech back with “Good Start!” written in the upper right-hand corner. We knew this usually meant numerous edits were to follow. But I never thought they were gratuitous or arbitrary. I always thought they were designed to improve the speech.

Years later, in a different corporate setting, when my speeches were edited by less creative people – in the technology group, for example, or in corporate affairs — the results were less pleasing.

On this subject, Dowis quotes what Peggy Noonan writes in her own book, What I Saw at the Revolution, “In the book she tells of writing a speech for the president to deliver to students in Shanghai. In her final draft of the speech, she included this paragraph:

“‘My young friends, history is a river that takes us as it will. But we have the power to navigate, to choose direction, and make our passage together. The wind is up, the tide is high, and the opportunity for a long and fruitful journey awaits us. Generations hence will honor us for having begun the voyage…’”

Dowis continues, “Ms. Noonan relates that a State Department functionary, in reviewing the draft, had numerous changes, including elimination of the metaphor of history as a river. His reason was that the metaphor was ‘politically unhelpful’ because, in his words, ‘the history is a river’ claim is more in line with standard Marxian theory regarding historical determination than with the idea that man can affect his fate.”

We’ve all been there, no?

Dowis suggests these steps in editing speeches, which are very helpful to those of us in who are freelance speechwriters without a built-in supervisor to edit our talks.

First, let it rest, he advises. “Once you have completed your draft, put it aside if time permits. Actually, the speech will never leave your subconscious mind. Your mind will continue to work on it, and when you get back to it, ready to do your editing, you’ll be able to look at it more objectively.”

Second, edit for content. “In editing a speech for content,” Dowis writes, “question everything. Check every statement, every statistic, every quotation for accuracy. Examine every metaphor, analogy, quotation, statistic, and illustration for stability. Be especially critical of your humorous touches. Most important, look at the overall content of the speech and ask yourself once more whether it fulfills the basic purpose of the speech as stated in your prewriting phase.”  Or outline, as we like to call it.

Third, edit for organization. Dowis writes, “Now is the time to be certain the speech is coherent, that it hangs together, that it is a unified presentation rather than just a collection of ideas and information. Remember transitions. When you go from one thought to another, is the transition smooth?”

Fourth, edit for style. “Editing for style,” says Dowis, “will probably produce the most changes.” This editing “involves how word combinations, sentences, and paragraphs are put together to create the meanings and impressions you want to convey with your speech.”

He continues, “Simplicity has a certain eloquence all its own. Never underestimate the power of a simple, declarative sentence.”

Fifth, edit for language. Dowis urges speechwriters to edit for overuse of jargon, use of too many long words, infrequent use of contractions and personal pronouns, overuse of the passive voice, use of clichés, and use of too many generalities rather than concrete words.              

Sixth and last, edit for grammar. “Although perfect grammar does not produce a perfect speech, too many instances of bad grammar can damage an otherwise good speech.”
 
So, there you have it. I know I’ll use these tips in editing all the speeches I write. But I’d pay a lot of money for time to do the very first one, “Let it rest.” Sigh…

In my last blog, I confessed that my year-old blog on speechwriting has not brought me any business. I asked readers to let me know if their blogs brought them business and, if not, what value they saw in blogging. I got some great responses I’ll share with you now.

Ian Griffin, who writes a wonderful blog called Professionally Speaking, said that his five-year-old blog has generated about half-a-dozen inquiries from potential clients. But he sees many other benefits from blogging, including:

·       “Establishing my professional reputation. Blog articles have led to speaking engagements at conferences.

·       “An archive for articles and topics I find of interest, which I can easily refer potential clients, and others, to.

·       “Participation in an on-line debate on speaking and speechwriting.”

Tim Hayes, an award-winning speechwriter who always has interesting things to say in his blogs, wrote this: “I have been posting blogs for roughly the same amount of time as you, I think, and I’ve gotten about five or six paying jobs from people who receive them.

“But here’s the catch – none of those projects have been from those seeing the blogs on LinkedIn. They all have been from people on a self-built and privately maintained e-mail list, including past and present clients, those I’ve met at local networking events, and the like.”  That’s something I haven’t done and think it’s a very smart idea.

Colin Moorhouse, who runs “We Need a Speech,” a web site for freelance and corporate speechwriters, wrote this, “My speech writing web site is much more a traditional web site rather than a blog, and it’s fairly static, meaning I don’t post that many articles. That said, about 15 percent of my speech work comes as a direct result of my site, and 90 percent of my sign-ups for my online speechwriting course come via the site.”

Colin continues, “The other question to consider is do you pay a price for not having a web presence? That is much tougher to answer because you would never know. And that is precisely the point.

“On balance,” he concludes, “I think having some sort of electronic presence, even a relatively static one, is a vital part of your publicity efforts. If nothing else, it provides a marketing tool for your signature lines in your e-mails, as well as a quick reference link for potential clients who want to see your work.”

Rusty Fischer, author of Freedom to Freelance and eBook Promotion Made eEasy, wrote, “I think I went into blogging…to establish an online presence and generate leads, but more than that it was designed as more of a showcase and a place to close leads.

“All my prospects want to see samples, and as a ghostwriter/ghostblogger, I can’t necessarily show them 99 percent of my work so I had to show them something.

“In that sense, blogging has given me a place to post copious amounts of sample work…and if a client is wavering between me and another ghost and they at least give my blog a cursory glance – i.e. read a post or two or three – I feel pretty confident they’ll make the right decision.”

Rusty also mentions he doesn’t ask his clients where/how they found him and that they might not even know because he is “online at not only my own blog but at Guru.com and Elance.com…”

Echoing others, he concludes, “I can say this much with confidence: I feel in my heart I’d have a lot less work if it wasn’t for the blog…”

Allison Wood, a professional communicator and speechwriter, at letterperfectspeeches.com, wrote this: “Rather than a direct job source, I see my blog as maybe one of the best examples of my writing that I can offer publicly. The URL is listed on all my promotional materials and I know that folks read the blog as additional background material on me and my writing style…”

She continues, “Even beyond the label of “speechwriter,” I am a communicator before all else – and the blog is a wonderful way to highlight and finesse my communications skills free of assignment requirements or restrictions. I sometimes dread the ‘obligation’ but always delight in posting once I’ve hit on one of those ‘can’t-resist’ topics.”  

Wonderful and insightful responses, and useful information too. I always knew my readers were smarter than I was. You’ve proved it yet again.               

 Today, dear friends in the speechwriting and writing blogosphere, I have a serious question: Has your blog brought you any business?

 I have been writing a blog on speechwriting for 13 months. It has been featured on a variety of Web sites, including the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC), Vital Speeches of the Day, Ragan Communications, “Six Minutes: Professional Speaking and Presentation Skills” and “Professionally Speaking,” among others.

Still, it has brought me not one job, one inquiry, one anything – expect nice friendships with other speechwriters and writers.

My business has come through other means – recommendations from current clients to new clients and ongoing work from past clients. 

This set me to wondering how and if other speechwriters have benefitted from their blogs, especially freelance speechwriters like myself.

Has your blog brought you any business? If not, what value do you think it serves in your overall business plan?

Thanks for your honesty and willingness to share.

A speech I’ve been writing for a new client has the “benefits of collaboration” as a major theme, so I’ve been researching the topic. In doing so, I was delighted to come across Keith Sawyer’s, Group Genius: The Creative Power of Collaboration.

I was doubly delighted to learn that even we solo practitioners – we lonely freelance speechwriters – can “collaborate”… with ourselves. Have faith; I’ll explain later.

Using examples as diverse as jazz ensembles, improve comedy troupes, helicopter rescue teams and his own stint at Atari developing video games, Sawyer makes a strong case that the most creative ideas come from a group of people who share both passion and purpose. They deeply care about the issue and have a vested interest in solving it.

Sawyer shares this story example, “In the early 1980’s, at my first job after college, I designed video games for Atari. Each game benefitted from constant collaboration; I talked to other game designers every day, and we held frequent brainstorming sessions to generate new game ideas. I worked with graphic designers who created the animation sequences that made the characters run, hop, and throw, and musicians who composed those memorable little beeps and bops.”

Sawyer is, of course, right about collaboration. During my career, I’ve been on staff as speechwriter with two corporations where I was part of speechwriting groups. I well remember the wonderful brainstorming we used to do over the half-walls of our cubbies. How does this sound? Do you think that’s the right word to use there? Should I use this quote? How does this paragraph work?

We’d also collaborate on images that supported each other’s speeches. How about this video clip? Can we use this music there? Does this chart enhance or detract from the talk? And on it went. The end products were invariably better than we would have produced alone.

But here I am – as are many of you – with my own speechwriting business and no one to bounce ideas off of, to brainstorm, to get the adrenaline coursing through my veins, or wherever it courses, and helping set my speeches on fire.

Fear not. Sawyer makes the case that we can, in fact, brainstorm…with ourselves. 

He writes, “I hope to have convinced you of the creative power of collaboration. But you still might wonder: Isn’t the individual mind the ultimate source of creativity? Doesn’t each creative spark come from a single person? In fact, researchers have discovered that the mind itself is filled with a kind of internal collaboration, and that even those insights that emerge when you’re completely alone can be traced back to previous collaborations.”

So there you have it. I guess Sondheim was right to title one of his songs, “No one is alone.”

A few blogs ago, I wrote about asking my clients to evaluate me as a speechwriter. I had not done this before. I had always focused on having audiences evaluate the speech itself, but I decided to be more pro-active and customer-focused by putting together an evaluation sheet to help clients evaluate their experience of working with me.

I asked for ideas for appropriate questions from my friends in the speechwriting blogosphere and got some great ideas. I’d like to share them with you now in case you decide to ask your clients to evaluate you.

My friend Allison Wood (www.letterperfectspeeches.com) suggested these questions:

• Were you satisfied with the quality and frequency of our communication?

• Was I respectful of your time?

• Did my work contribute to your feeling comfortable and confident with this presentation?

• What was the most valuable contribution I made to this project?

• If we work together in the future, what could I do that would make the experience more pleasant and productive for you?

To this I would only add the question to which I really want to know the answer:

• Were you happy with the speech?

Fellow writer Margaret Cekis suggested response boxes be marked, “Yes,” “No” and “Somewhat,” with some blank lines for comments.

I think these are excellent ideas. Have you had experience with evaluations for your speechwriting services? What kinds of questions have you asked? What kinds of results?

Thanks for your wonderful input.

I caught the original Die Hard movie on TV the other day, and remembered why I love it. First, there’s a young, virile Bruce Willis (with hair) – so cool, so tough, so much the hero. Sigh…

Then, there’s the plot – so simple it’s genius. On Christmas Eve, NYPD Detective John McClane visits his estranged wife Holly at her office in LA’s Nakatomi Tower for a reunion and a Christmas party. But terrorist Hans Gruber (the wonderful Alan Rickman) and his cohorts burst in – taking over the building and taking McClain’s wife and some 30 others hostage.  

Throughout the rest of the movie, McClane eludes the bad guys, forms a friendship via CB radio with LA Police Sergeant Al Powell (the sweet Reginald VelJohnson), and eventually thwarts the evil-doers, saves the hostages…and his relationship with Holly.

Believe it or not, as I watched the movie I thought about speakers and speeches. Wouldn’t you follow John McClane anywhere? Wouldn’t you believe what he told you? Wouldn’t you know he’d get you out of any tough spot?

You bet. He’s a natural leader. Tough, compassionate, street smart.

And the script? Simple, linear, compact. The problem is clear; the solution obvious. It’s McClane and the forces of light vs. Gruber and the forces of darkness.   

Can speakers and speechwriters learn anything from a film like Die Hard? I think so. First, a speaker must project honesty, empathy, resolve. He must have and express a clear mission. 

Next, the speechwriter must make sure the speech narrative is clear, concise, compelling. Don’t try to cover the waterfront. Limit your messages, rally the troops. Help your speaker be the hero.

Yippee kai yay.

It’s something I should have done a long time ago, but I confess I never have. What is it?  Ask my clients to evaluate my services after I’ve written a speech for them. I know it’s the right thing to do in an uber-competitive, consumer-driven, customer-feedback world. And I know it’s the professional thing to do in terms of good customer relations management and service improvement. But, in truth, I’m dreading it.

I’m trying to figure out why. Maybe it has to with that primal sense of shame we all carry – you know, the one that makes us feel guilty in the presence of a police officer, even when we’ve done nothing wrong. The conviction (no pun intended) that if we were ever to take a lie-detector test, we’d fail.

My mother remembers a skit from the old “Sid Caesar Show,” in which Howie Morris is the attorney for Sid Caesar, who’s in court for a traffic ticket. Morris encourages Caesar to let him fight the ticket and Caesar agrees. But Morris is such a bumbling, incompetent attorney that in the end Caesar is sent to the electric chair. This would happen to me.

But I digress.

In constructing my evaluation form, I’m looking to my speechwriter friends in the blogosphere to give me some advice. What are the questions I should ask? Where in the process should I solicit comments? Right after the speech has been delivered?

Thanks so much for your help.

I must confess I wasn’t thrilled when I heard President Obama’s Tuesday night speech on the Gulf oil disaster.

But today, when I actually read the full speech, I thought much better of it.

We’ve all been there, haven’t we? As speechwriters, we compose some mighty fine prose, but sometimes “between the idea and the reality,” as T.S. Eliot wrote, “falls the shadow.” Our speakers let us down in the delivery department.

However, Obama did deliver one idea, near the end of the speech, I initially thought was odd. Turns out it wasn’t.

The President refers to the successes of World War II (the country quickly mobilizes to manufacture enough tanks and planes) and the Apollo space program (the country succeeds in meeting JFK’s call to put a man on the moon by the end of the decade), as examples of what Americans can do when we set our minds to conquering challenges some call, “too big and too difficult,” in the President’s words.

Why, I wondered, did Obama hark back to things that occurred so long ago? After all, WW II ended 65 years ago and man first walked on the moon in 1969. Like, okay, but what have you done for me lately?

And then, in a conversation with my very smart husband, it dawned on me. There are no recent examples of what we’ve done as a people on a grand scale that match either of those two achievements – saving the world or putting a man on the moon. If you want to give inspirational examples of what Americans can accomplish when they come together with a mission, you will have to look to the last century. Yikes.  

As my husband helpfully pointed out, these two accomplishments were achieved under two Democratic presidents with vision and courage. I’m not sure Obama possesses these to the extent we hoped, but the Republicans and Democrats who preceded him certainly did not. Not Nixon (the opening of China was not big or grand enough and gets trumped by Watergate anyway), not Ford nor Carter, Bush 41, Clinton nor Bush 43 (who missed the opportunity presented by 9/11 to rally Americans to end dependence on Mid-East oil and focus our time and money on the R & D required to develop alternate energy sources).

Reagan came closest to having and expressing a larger vision. I believe he identified with the aspirations of the “common man,” as did speechwriter Peggy Noonan who wrote beautiful and powerful remarks for him: “Mr. Gorbachev – tear down this wall” in a speech at the Brandenburg Gate; “We will never forget them nor the last time we saw them this morning as they prepared for their journey and waved goodbye and ‘slipped the surly bonds of earth to touch the face of God,’” on the Challenger explosion; and “These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. These are the men who took the cliffs. These are the champions who helped free a continent…” at Normandy on the 40th anniversary of D-Day.

What I believe about speechwriting applies to all good speeches – whether given by a president, a business leader or the head of a non-profit. A good speech must call its audience to embrace a cause larger than itself.  When it does, it can inspire the audience to act in a way that furthers that cause.    

All human beings share common needs and aspirations. Today, we share lots more. “To see the earth as it truly is,” Archibald MacLeish wrote, “small and blue and beautiful/in that eternal silence where it floats/is to see ourselves as riders on the earth together/brothers in that bright loveliness…/brothers who know now they are truly brothers.”

The collapse of an American investment bank on September 15, 2008, triggers a meltdown in the global financial system and a worldwide economic and jobs crisis from which we’re still trying to recover. An oil spill in the Gulf destroys an ecosystem, impacting everything from the price of oil to the price and availability of fish. Ash spewing from a volcano in Iceland disrupts air travel and compromises the vitality of airlines around the world. And debts Greece cannot pay de-stabilize the EU and the euro.

A president in tune with himself and the world around him can capture and speak to these commonalities, to all that we share in this interdependent world.

So, is it a lack of “the vision thing” that prevents our presidents – and the business, education and government leaders we write for – from calling on their audiences to embrace the big idea, the hard but noble thing, the cause larger than themselves? Perhaps.

The good news is that speechwriters have a positive role to play in this area. Speechwriters are often default policy-makers. Many speakers are unclear about what they want to say. Speakers want us to bring clarity, direction and purpose to a talk. They are looking for a draft to react to.
 
Use the power you have. Mold your speech around a common human purpose. Put that big idea in your speech draft. See if it flies.

You’ll be doing something important for yourself, your speaker and his or her audiences. The world will be a better place and it will make you happy. 

What could be better?

The other night I watched a PBS special featuring a singing group called 4Troops, made up of four Iraq and Afghanistan combat veterans.

While on the front lines in Iraq, Meredith Melcher’s ambulance platoon successfully evacuated hundreds of injured Americans and Iraqis to higher levels of medical treatment. She is 29.

David Clemo, 30, first provided communications support in Afghanistan; as communications chief during his second deployment, in Iraq, he laid fiber optic cable.

Daniels Jens, 36, joined the Army after the events of 9/11. In October 2007, he deployed to Iraq with the 1st Calvary Division as a crew member of the Field Artillery Cannon.

And during a 20-year military career, Ron Henry, 41, spent seven years traveling the unprotected roads of Iraq as transporter and transportation manager.

These four powerful voices have come together to support active military members, veterans and their families and honor their sacrifices in song.  

Their singing was heartfelt and beautiful; learning about them reminded me of how whimsical life can be.  Could these four individuals have imagined that joining the Army would bring them a singing career they may have dreamt of, a CD, a concert tour and PBS special? Yet it did.

What’s this got to do with speechwriting, you may ask. Be patient, gentle reader. Everything belongs.

What set of circumstances brought you to speechwriting? Did you always enjoy writing? Did you have a teacher that encouraged you, as many have? Was there a particular story or book that inspired you to believe you, too, could have your way with words?

Did you start out as a newspaper reporter, perhaps, as I did? When did you discover you could pull together words and ideas that resonated with others? Did you first give a speech yourself, before you wrote for anyone else?

Did you, like me, fall in love with words and phrases, poetry and prose? Did you love the way they sounded, tasted, felt on your tongue? Did you realize parallel structure was your thing? Did you get compliments on your writing and decide it felt pretty good?

Beyond that, like 4Troops, did you begin your professional life expecting to go in one direction before life took you in another?  What of all the people you met along the way? People who noticed you, edited you, challenged you, promoted you? 

Just like the members of 4Troops, your life as a speechwriter today is the product of the people you met, the places you went, the experiences and lucky breaks you had and the hard work you did.

Life is funny; yes, it is. But also, like the unexpected success of 4Troops, the broken road that led us to become speechwriters is the result of a loving God who takes our Jackson Pollock painting of a life and fashions it into a Thomas Eakins portrait.  Or, keeping the music of 4Troops in mind, He often takes the dissonant chords of our lives and uses them to compose a symphony.

What do you think?

These days, I seem to be having trouble saying “enough is enough” to myself when it comes to doing research for a speech. Do you have this problem too?

I recently was hired to write a speech on the “The Future of Work,” for the head of HR at a global corporation. The speech is being given abroad next week to an international audience of internal HR professionals. 
 
I was delighted with the assignment and the topic. A good part of the speech focuses on macro trends in the makeup of the labor force, the HR organization and the use of technology in the workplace going forward.  

I began by researching the web sites of McKinsey, The Harvard Business Review, TIME, Newsweek, Business Week, The Economist and more for articles on the future of work.

The speaker wanted to use clips from the old “Jetsons” TV shows to talk about examples of technologies that seemed far-fetched at the time, but now are in use – thank you, YouTube (I didn’t forget copyright issues).

I researched the space program because the speaker wanted examples of its real-life benefits. I now know that scratch-resistant lenses, cordless power tools and athletic shoes are by-products of space flight – but not “Tang” or GPS, as my speaker had hoped. 

The International Labour Office had a 2010 report on “Global Employment Trends;” the Rand Corporation had produced “The 21st Century at Work” study, and The Forum for the Future of Higher Education had written on “Educating Americans for Tomorrow’s Global Labor Market.”

I researched the use of avatars in the workplace in a piece by Stanford’s Byron Reeves, author of Total Engagement: Using Games and Virtual Worlds to Change the Way People Work and Businesses Compete; and found articles on leading the virtual workforce, using social media to keep remote workers connected and building trust and respect with a globally dispersed workforce – all on the IABC (International Association of Business Communicators) web site.

At referenceforbusiness.com, I found a report on “Trends in Organizational Change;” at workforcemanagment.com, I uncovered “Fast Forward: 25 Trends That Will Change the Way You Do Business;” Michigan University’s Ross School of Business updates its “Human Resources Competency Study” every five years; I read the latest one.

The United Nations published a “World Population Study to 2300,” which turned out to be an excellent source of how changing population trends will impact the global workforce.  

HR Magazine featured a piece by The London Business School’s Lynda Gratton on “The Future of Work;” The Partnership for the 21st Century (p21.org) posted “Executives Say the 21st Century Requires More Skilled Workers,” based on a survey conducted by the American Management Association.

At humanresources.about.com, I read articles titled, “A New Role for HR: Support Your Company’s Brand,” and “Are You Ready for an Agile Future? The Agile Organization Embraces Change.”

My husband, who’s studying for his master’s in library science, has been telling me about “transliteracy.” Transliteracy will be a valuable skill in the new decade as ideas migrate across multiple social media platforms, including podcasts, digital video, virtual worlds, microblogs, wikis and social networking.

The transliterate organization will have the capacity to get the information it needs when it needs it by communicating and interacting across all these platforms. I researched this interesting facet of the future of work and included it in the speech.

Finally, it seemed to me, no speech on the future of work would be complete without reference to Tom Friedman’s best seller, The World is Flat. Not having time to read the entire book for the purposes of this speech (I’ll get to it, Tom, I promise), I found several sites with meaningful summaries. I extracted information relevant to the speech and quoted it.

All this research doesn’t even include what I found on the company’s web site itself, including excellent reports and studies it had done; audio and video from its archive (two of which were so “on target” they ended up in the speech); and the company’s annual report.        

It also doesn’t include the research I did on the use of technology in today’s world – how many “tweets” and texts are sent daily around the globe. How many people are up on FaceBook, eBay and the World Wide Web. How many have purchased iPods, iPhones and even iPads.  

It also doesn’t include all the links I followed, some promising, some not, as an idea or piece of information in one place put me in mind of others that begged to be explored.  

Let’s face it, I’m an information whore. I’ll go anywhere with anyone if I think it will give me a great “nugget” for a speech.   

Believe it or not, this speech had a five-day turnaround. Yikes! Research took two full days; reading it all (I print out almost everything I research so I can underline what’s important, make margin notes about which section of the speech it will support, etc.) took another day-and-a-half, and writing the speech itself, about two days. Then I sent it off.

I would have liked at minimum another two days – to sleep on it, to let it percolate in my head, to revise/tweak it, to read it aloud again and again to see how it sounded, felt, tasted.

Alas, this is my tale. I would love to hear yours. How do you know when to pull the plug on your research when time is at a premium yet you want to make the talk as “meaty” and excellent as it can be?

I’m all ears…at least until I get back to researching the current speech I’m writing. It’s also a fascinating subject – how the Midwest economy might be revived in the face of globalization, the decline in family farms and the loss of its manufacturing base. I have my work cut out for me.

But I’m a happy camper because I’ve got a two-month lead time.