Letter to the Editor: In defense of the graduation speeches

June 25, 2010
by Ben Zinberg

Dear Editor,

One of the challenges in writing a graduation speech is the need to satisfy a very broad audience.  Both students and adults attend the graduation ceremony, and in order to satisfy them, a very difficult balance must be achieved between humor and seriousness, levity and gravity.  This year Greeley was lucky to have five very distinct speeches from five very interesting students (two co-salutatorians, the class president, the student council president and the valedictorian).  Judging from the frequent laughter and applause, a large part of the audience enjoyed the speeches very much. 

But, as you can see from the comments on NCNOW’s publication of Ezra’s speech, some of the audience members were disappointed with the speeches.  I engaged in the discussion on that page, meeting the strong negative language of the first couple of comments with a defensive reply. 

My most recent reply was too long to submit on that page, but I am submitting it to NewCastleNOW as a letter to the editor because I believe it sheds light on some important points.  Following are the main two comments to which I am responding (previous comments can be found on the above Web page), followed by my response. The former appear to have been written by adults, and the latter was written by me, the valedictory speaker and, more importantly, a student who is privy to the school culture and inside jokes referenced in the speeches.

Comment by Anne D, 06/23/2010

To answer Mr.Zinberg: Since my comments followed the only two speeches published in NCNOW, it should be apparent to you that those were the speeches being referenced in my original comments. Both speeches made references to school employees to elicit laughter and I think that is a cheap shot.  It’s surprising that your reply was a bit abrasive and intolerant. Aren’t we all entitled to hold an opinion even if it’s not yours?

Tell us, Mr. Zinberg, HS Mom and Ms. King, were the salutatorian’s references to urinal dividers and condom volleyball appropriate topics for a graduation ceremony? If your answer is yes, the point proves itself. Toilet humor and references to anything sexual usually does bring lots of laughter from high school audiences, but is it appropriate at a graduation ceremony? I think not. It will always be bad form. The standards by which appropriate behaviors are judged here in Chappaqua appear to be in a confused and battered state.

Comment by HS Mom #2, 06/23/2010

I agree with Anne. Young Mr Toback’s “List” was completely inappropriate,  insulting and offensive. The fact that the parents of this student and the administration of HGHS would allow it to be presented is disgraceful.  If this represents the “best and brightest” what a disappointment.  Good luck to Mr. Toback in the real world, he’ll need it.

Response by Ben Zinberg, 06/24/2010

Anne D, thank you for clarifying your remark.  The reason I acted offended at your first comment was that I spoke at the ceremony, and before you had made your clarification I viewed the comment as an attack on me along with the other four student speakers.

I try not to be intolerant.  You are entitled to be offended by the speeches.  Additionally, if you believe that these attitudes validate your general opinion that an egotistical arrogance pervades the town, it is of course your prerogative to say so.  Though, I would not consider it “surprising” that a town resident responded abrasively to such a statement.

I certainly understand how Ezra’s speech could be considered offensive.  It was Ezra’s decision to give a lighthearted, jocular speech instead of a more traditional serious one. This may be interpreted as an insult to the task and privilege of giving a salutatory address.  To varying degrees, all five of the student speeches were humorous, and perhaps insulting for this reason as well.

Speech filled with inside jokes and references

Another possible disappointment with Ezra’s speech is that it is full of inside jokes and references exclusive to students.  Of these, I will specifically address the ones that you brushed off as “toilet humor and references to anything sexual.”

Toilet humor may be unsophisticated, but (despite the name) it is more than just laughing at the mention of a piece of furniture.  Urinal dividers have been the recurring campaign promise of class presidents for years.  Their installment has proven very cumbersome to coordinate between the student government and the administration, and it was only recently that dividers were installed.  The students’ amusement at this remark was derived from remembering the student government assemblies and celebrating the delayed fulfillment of this old promise.

Our school takes a very progressive approach to sex education.  The board of education would much rather see students have a silly attitude toward condoms than a reluctant one. One class period of the sophomore health class each year is devoted to practicing putting condoms on wooden penises and playing silly games with inflated condoms. 

The idea behind this is that, in encouraging students to use protection, it is crucial not only to increase their awareness and competence, but also to minimize the discomfort and taboo surrounding contraception.  Ezra probably chose to mention this day because it was one of the most fun and memorable class periods for all Greeley students.  However, I do agree with you that the idea of condom volleyball could be shocking and offensive to audience members coming from societies with different attitudes toward contraception and sex education.

While I see how the speeches could be offensive to you, they certainly were not a “cheap shot” at the people specifically mentioned within the speeches.  Individual people were only mentioned if they gave permission for it.  At the graduation rehearsal, the senior class vice principal informed a few students that Keith was very happy about the positive recognition he was getting.  He also gave permission to NewCastleNOW to publish pictures of him in this article.  Keith is a very distinct and well-liked character whom all Greeley students come to know and respect very quickly.  It is because of this positive relationship with students that Keith is able to soundly construe the jocular but endearing remarks as a friendly gesture.

Disagreement with content of speeches does not justify a personal attack

All five speeches mixed serious elements with humor.  Each speaker tried his best to achieve a balance between the two in order to keep the audience entertained while still delivering a substantial message.  Perhaps you found Ezra’s and Zach’s speeches to contain too many jokes.  Of course, it is no one’s place to say that your opinion is wrong. However, your objection is no more than a disagreement between you and the speakers. In particular, it is not any of the following:

1. Justification for a personal attack on the speakers.  Perhaps you find these speeches to be egotistical.  Personally I find Ezra’s to be silly and Zach’s to be heartfelt.  Either way, these speeches were not intended to be summaries of the speakers’ personalities.  I do not believe it is meaningful to attribute the tones of the speeches to “overblown egos” without ever having met either of these two speakers.  HS Mom #2, I have known Ezra for over ten years, and frankly I am insulted that you have expressed such convicted disgust in my friend as a person after hearing or reading a ten-minute speech.

2. Indicative of an entire school or town.  The students who spoke are nothing more than five students from the high school.  You suggest that the attitudes of the speakers reflect the arrogance of all of Chappaqua.  Well, I claim that the gender of the speakers reflects the fact that 100 percent of Chappaqua residents are male.  You are entitled to have general opinions about Chappaqua residents, but it is a fallacy to suggest that this sample of five students implies anything about the whole body.  (You have not suggested this; you have only given your general attitude toward Chappaqua and then pointed out that your impression of the speakers is consistent with it.  I am only discussing this fallacy because I believe it is an important one to recognize.)

HS Mom #2, you seem to believe that the title of salutatorian labels Ezra as the “best and brightest” of the school.  In the first place, class rankings are based solely on grades. Ezra is only considered the “best” with respect to cumulative grade point average, not necessarily character or likelihood of success in the future.  In the second place, the respectfulness and appropriateness of a speech do not have much to do with intelligence.

You also place blame on Ezra’s parents for “allowing” him to deliver his speech.  But perhaps his parents did not see the speech at all before it was delivered.  After all, Ezra is about to leave for college and make all of his decisions independently.  Perhaps his parents felt that at this stage of life he should be treated like a mature young adult who is free of mandatory censorship by his parents.

The speeches may not have been well received by quite everyone, but one thing is for sure: the speakers put much thought into both the content and the style of their speeches. A town resident may believe that Zach’s speech was too humorous, for example, but it is evident from Zach’s words that he has a profound appreciation and understanding of what humor means in his life.  I commend the efforts of the four other student speakers, and it was a pleasure to collaborate and rehearse with them.

Ben Zinberg
Greeley graduate and valedictorian