Excerpt from a TJ Walker livestream (Aug 17, 2015) in which a viewer (Shane) asks how to create flow between abstract points in a presentation about authoritarianism. Walker argues that flow is less important than making points interesting, understandable, and memorable; he advises pairing abstract claims with specific examples, case studies or stories.
Chapters
Shane writes in with another question about flow. Let's take a look at the specifics. He says. DJ how to create flow? This is my presentation content. Authoritarianism is a cluster of attitude. There are three types of authoritarianism attitudes, authoritarian submission, authoritarian aggression, conservatism. I think it will bore audiences if I name out the attitudes one by one. How can I create flow, bringing one point to the next point. Thanks, Shane. Well, Shane, I'm going to say something that's a bit contrarian in the public speaking world, so not everyone agrees with what I'm going to say, but here it is. I'm just not that interested in flow when it comes to presentations. I don't think audiences are. I'm far more interested in Are you saying something interesting and memorable? That's what your focus should be. What you just gave me here may be perfectly fine as an outline, but they're just abstractions. Authoritarianism, yes. I can define it, others can too, but in the abstract it doesn't mean anything. If you want to talk about authoritarianism aggression, then give a specific example of here's what Adolf Hitler did in this town and here's how it destroyed people's lives or whatever examples you want to give. The rule of thumb is don't ever give an abstract point without giving a specific example, a case study, and even a story if you want the audience to remember it. And I don't know why you'd be speaking if you don't want them to remember it. So rather than worry about flow, focus first and foremost on being interesting, understandable and memorable. You do that. Flow is going to take care of itself, I promise you.