When I was little, I had a very basic “magician set” of gimmicky tricks. I performed them to accommodating adults at every opportunity. In retrospect, even the most cursory of examinations of that cheap plastic would have uncovered the simple mechanisms involved in the illusion. I grew out of such cheap parlor tricks.
But in communication, both in terms of formal presentations and interpersonal conversations, there are verbal parlor tricks.
It’s very easy, through the manipulation of language, to obscure the truth and accuracy of things. Semantically and linguistically, we can make things seem backwards or upside down. We can “prove” the opposite of what we believe. If you’ve ever been in a class, you’ve probably seen it. Some students perform very dexterously with their words … but such gymnastic contortions do not so much add to the conversation as they distort it.
A prime example is the use of hypothetical situations. Now, I readily admit the necessity of crafting a pretend context in order to demonstrate a point or ask a question. Hypothetical situations allow us to more accurately analyze the question under consideration. That being said, sometimes hypothetical situations delve into the realm of the needless or inane. You can make a hypothetical situation demonstrate anything, however far removed from actuality and possibility. The point may be “proven” but to what end?
Twisting language and possibility into the realm of the technical and obscure may be fun or interesting, but it can also be pointless and time consuming.
In conversations and descriptions, sometimes I like to think of Antoine de Saint-Exupery’s [Author of The Little Prince] quote, “Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.”
The challenge in thought is to communicate concisely and accurately. “Pith” should be our watchword and our goal. Sometimes concepts require more grandiose descriptions. There is a time and a place for hypotheticals and delving deeply into theory and technical vocabulary. But that time is when such use of language furthers another person’s understanding of a topic, rather than demonstrating our own linguistic prowess.
This, admittedly, is the ideal. It’s an ideal that is often easier to achieve outside the classroom. There are pressures in the very system of education that move us toward a tendency to flaunt our understanding and intellect. If part of our grade, or at least our perception in the eyes of the professor, is contingent upon our “participation,” why not throw out some verbal kitsch. But even in day-to-day conversations, I’ve encountered plenty of confusing, if trivial, speech craft.
I like words. I like being able to talk extensively and intellectually about a topic. But these enjoyments should never be at the expense of clarity, truth, or discussion. The ability to “talk in circles” around a class or conversation is not so much a demonstration of actual smarts as it is of pride. Take pride in being clear instead.
Originally published in the Willamette Collegian.