Mary Beard at the Guardian writes a mainly interesting piece about Great Speeches, but look out for her peculiar idea that "there is something problematic about the very notion of "great oratory". For a start, it is an almost entirely male category."

Huh?

This is more like it (apart from the stupid categorisation of Enoch Powell as a ‘rabble rouser’):

Even now, we feel squeamish about powerful oratory directed towards unpalatable ends. The Guardian’s selection of "great speeches" exposed this very nicely. There was a snippet from De Gaulle, but nothing from Hitler. No Oswald Mosley, no Ian Paisley, and no Enoch Powell.

We are all presumably happier to count those as "demagogues" or "rabble rousers". But isn’t the difference between a "demagogue" and a "great orator" simply whether we like their politics or not – and nothing much to do with the oratorical power?

Read the comments too where some lively points are made, including one from me.

Then rush off and enter Max Atkinson’s fine Doomed Dictator speech competition. Deadline for entries = 28 February.