Writing Excuses: Exhibit A on How to be a Classy Panelist
I’ve talked about classy panelist strategies before. But after my latest guest appearance on Writing Excuses, I realized I’ve left out a huge piece of the puzzle.
See, in my last post I focused on egocentric strategies: things you can do - as an individual - to ensure that you make a good impression and offer something of value to the audience. That’s a great starting point for panel etiquette. But if you’ve ever listened to Writing Excuses, you know there’s a dynamic that exists above and beyond the behavior of any individual panelist. There’s a synergy that happens. The podcast isn’t just a bunch of really smart people sharing their thoughts. It’s a group of engaging professionals having a conversation together, building on each others’ ideas, creating a gestalt experience that delights and entertains the listener.
You might think this magical effect is mere slight of hand - that the Writing Excuses cast just knows each other really well, and that’s why they’re able to work so well together. Granted, they are very familiar with each others’ careers and conversational styles, but I don’t think that’s why every episode feels like one of the awesomest panels from my favorite conventions. Because I’ve walked into those recording sessions blind, and felt their camaraderie reach out to enfold me. I’ve sat on convention panels with people who had never before met and watched a delightfully enthralling conversation unfold.
So no, I don’t think the magic comes because the panelists know each other. I think it comes because they mutually understand a fundamental truth: that consummate conversations are far more than the sum of their parts.
That’s what I want to talk about today. Panelists as part of a greater whole.
(By the way, even if you never anticipate being on a panel, this post may still be relevant. Because good panelist etiquette is, conveniently, also an excellent set of protocols for basic social interaction at, oh, you know, parties and business meetings and evil overlord convocations and suchlike.)
So how does one go about creating a consummate conversation?
It begins with an awareness of the entire discussion, rather than one’s own part of it. A solid conversation is balanced. No one person does all the speaking. And generally, for most topics, there’s an ample supply of interesting information accompanied by entertaining witticisms, relevant insights, and a smattering of tasteful humor.
The most engaging panelists I know are actively aware of the shape of the conversation. They offer other panelists an opportunity to speak. They don’t drop a joke on top of someone else’s stirring emotional confession. They speak at length only when no one else has anything to say, and they know whether the other panelists have a contribution to make because they watch for subtle signs in their peripheral vision. Intakes of breath, slightly uplifted hands, or sudden shifts in facial expression can all notify the speaker of someone else’s desire to speak. And the panelist who is watching the shape of the conversation, rather than concentrating on her own bundle of words, will gracefully leave half her brilliant ideas unspoken because she knows the panel is most interesting when speakers swap off often.
The best panelists I know build off each others’ ideas. If panelist A postulates a fictional story in which scientists discover life on Venus, panelist B notes that fact. Then, when panelist B gets ready to discuss characterization he will demonstrate his point by using one of the scientists from the Venusian expedition rather than inventing a new scenario from scratch. Afterwards, panelist C will refer to completely unrelated material - a novel by a famous author - in a way that further illustrates panelist B’s point. Near the end of the session, Panelist D may decide to throw in a joke about Venusian biospheres.
Do you see what is happening here? The conversation begins to take on a structure, with running plot threads and recurring themes, not unlike a short story in microcosm. The panelists build this structure together, with a running awareness of mood and narrative tone. They are creating an integrated project, not a mish-mash of individual presentations. They are manufacturing a joint experience in which the audience shares.
Do all panelists manage this all the time? Heck, no, not even the experienced ones. I know I’ve certainly got a lot of room for improvement. But I’ve noticed that the panelists I admire most are extremely aware of the other people at the table and of the overall path of the conversation.
Pay attention the next time you listen to Writing Excuses. You will see all these techniques in action, and the results are spectacular.
----------------------------------------------
cross-posted from nancyfulda.com
----------------------------------------------