The Commencement Conundrum: When Egos Trump Rituals

The graduation speech is often touted as an opportunity for a community to come together and celebrate the achievements of its members. However, behind the façade of pomp and circumstance lies a complex web of expectations, compromises, and commercial interests.

According to David Murray, a professional speechwriter with the Professional Speechwriters Association, dispensing memorable advice can be a high-wire act that rarely succeeds. Take Steve Jobs’ infamous Stanford speech, where he coined the phrase “stay hungry, stay foolish,” or Toni Morrison’s moving address at Wellesley, where she spoke of “true adulthood.” These speeches have become the gold standard against which all others are judged.

A good commencement speech is not about creating a lasting legacy but rather serving as a catalyst for the moment. As Jim Reische, special adviser to the president at Williams College, puts it, “the ritual is the thing.” The speaker’s role is not to offer profound insights or challenge the status quo but to provide a comforting sentiment and then get out of the way.

When this delicate balance is upset, the result can be disastrous. We’ve seen it time and again: speakers chosen for their celebrity status rather than their relevance to the community, delivering speeches that are more about self-promotion than inspiration. Take Bill Cosby’s 1990s commencement speech at my own university – I don’t recall a single word he said because his message was simply not relevant to me or my peers.

This century has seen an arms race in commencement-address celebrity, with universities competing for prestige by luring big-name speakers onto campus. The University of Houston paid Matthew McConaughey $166,000 for his 2015 graduation speech, while Katie Couric received a six-figure sum from the University of Oklahoma in 2006 – only to donate it to charity.

The process of identifying and inviting a commencement speaker has become increasingly complex, involving organizational politics and compromises that often leave the ritual itself at risk. The issue of controversy surrounding campus speech is also a concern, as seen in the recent case of the University of Central Florida graduation speaker who got booed after praising artificial intelligence.

In this climate, it’s no wonder that many graduates today are more focused on getting their diplomas than listening to what their commencement speakers have to say. As Reische notes, “commencement speeches are weird” – but perhaps they don’t need to be. By reorienting our expectations around the role of the speaker and the purpose of the speech itself, we can create a more meaningful and authentic experience for all involved.

The question is: what kind of rituals do we want to create? Do we prioritize the ego-driven spectacle of big-name speakers over the quiet moment of community celebration? Or do we strive for something more profound – a speech that truly speaks to the hearts and minds of its audience, even if it’s not remembered tomorrow morning?