Part 12 of an occasional series

I am a collector of quotations. I have been ever since I learned how to write, I mean professionally, not in primary school.

I am particularly fond of what I like to call “pithy prose”. These short quotations can cover an unlimited variety of subjects: love, religion, politics, human nature, etc. What unites them is their ability to say more in one or two sentences than could be expressed in a thousand-word treatise. It’s like being able to pour a liter of liquid into a half-liter bottle.

They are superb examples of Mark Twain’s famous dictum, “The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.”

In principle, all writers and public speakers are capable of producing pithy prose, but clearly some are better at it than others.

Any collection of pithy prose must necessarily be biased in terms of what it includes and excludes. I make no apologies for my selections, only for the hundreds of other meritorious quotations I had to leave out.

No one will agree with all these quotations; this was not their intention. You may even find some of them repugnant or outrageous. This was their intention.

We seldom learn anything of value from what we already agree with. Only those ideas that grate on our nerves can open our minds. As with oysters, irritation can produce pearls. So if anything you are about to read annoys or shocks you, try to think clearly and dispassionately about what it is saying. You will either be confirmed in your current belief or shaken into re-examining it.

Either way, you win!

This article is part of an occasional series. In each article, I will be offering more amusing, educating, and exasperating quotations to your judgment. But just to be certain that we agree on what we are talking about, here it is in a nutshell.

Pithy Prose: A quotation where at first you may not be quite certain what it means. But when you become certain, you become equally certain that it couldn’t have been said better any other way. In short, big ideas in small packages.

If you have a better definition of pithy prose, please contact me. I would love to hear it.

Who Is Blaise Pascal?

Blaise Pascal (1623 – 1662), a contemporary René Descartes, was mathematical prodigy. At the age pf 16, he published a significant work on the geometry of conical sections. At the age of 19, he invented a mechanical calculating machine using gears. Together with Pierre de Fermat, he founded the modern theory of probability. In physics, Pascal’s Law is the basis of the hydraulic press, hydraulic brakes, and other important applications. His chief philosophical work is titled simply “Pensées” (Thoughts).

1. A trifle consoles us, for a trifle distresses us.

2. All human evil comes from a single cause, man’s inability to sit still in a room.

3. All of our reasoning ends in surrender to feeling.

4. Between us and heaven or hell there is only life, which is the frailest thing in the world.

5. Can anything be stupider than that a man has the right to kill me because he lives on the other side of a river and his ruler has a quarrel with mine, though I have not quarrelled with him?

6. Contradiction is not a sign of falsity, nor the lack of contradiction a sign of truth.

7. Custom is our nature. What are our natural principles but principles of custom?

8. Earnestness is enthusiasm tempered by reason.

9. Eloquence is a painting of the thoughts.

10. Faith embraces many truths which seem to contradict each other.

11. Faith indeed tells what the senses do not tell, but not the contrary of what they see. It is above them and not contrary to them.

12. Faith is different from proof; the latter is human, the former is a Gift from God.

13. Human beings must be known to be loved; but Divine beings must be loved to be known.

14. If man made himself the first object of study, he would see how incapable he is of going further. How can a part know the whole?

15. Imagination decides everything.

16. In faith there is enough light for those who want to believe and enough shadows to blind those who don’t.

17. It is incomprehensible that God should exist, and it is incomprehensible that he should not exist.

18. It is natural for the mind to believe and for the will to love; so that, for want of true objects, they must attach themselves to false.

19. Justice and power must be brought together, so that whatever is just may be powerful, and whatever is powerful may be just.

20. Justice and truth are too such subtle points that our tools are too blunt to touch them accurately.

21. Justice without force is powerless; force without justice is tyrannical.

22. Love has reasons which reason cannot understand.

23. Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed.

24. Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness.

25. Men blaspheme what they do not know.

26. Men despise religion; they hate it and fear it is true.

27. Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction.

28. Nature is an infinite sphere of which the center is everywhere and the circumference nowhere.

29. Noble deeds that are concealed are most esteemed.

30. Nothing fortifies scepticism more than the fact that there are some who are not sceptics; if all were so, they would be wrong.

31. Nothing is as approved as mediocrity, the majority has established it and it fixes it fangs on whatever gets beyond it either way.

32. People are generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come in to the mind of others.

33. Reason commands us far more imperiously than a master; for in disobeying the one we are unfortunate, and in disobeying the other we are fools.

34. Since we cannot know all that there is to be known about anything, we ought to know a little about everything.

35. Small minds are concerned with the extraordinary, great minds with the ordinary.

36. That we must love one God only is a thing so evident that it does not require miracles to prove it.

37. The charm of fame is so great that we like every object to which it is attached, even death.

38. The greater intellect one has, the more originality one finds in men. Ordinary persons find no difference between men.

39. The last proceeding of reason is to recognize that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it. There is nothing so conformable to reason as this disavowal of reason.

40. The least movement is of importance to all nature. The entire ocean is affected by a pebble.

41. The only shame is to have none.

42. The strength of a man’s virtue must not be measured by his efforts, but by his ordinary life.

43. The supreme function of reason is to show man that some things are beyond reason.

44. There are only two kinds of men: the righteous who think they are sinners and the sinners who think they are righteous.

45. There are some who speak well and write badly. For the place and the audience warm them, and draw from their minds more than they think of without that warmth.

46. Time heals griefs and quarrels, for we change and are no longer the same persons. Neither the offender nor the offended are any more themselves.

47. We never love a person, but only qualities.

48. When we are in love we seem to ourselves quite different from what we were before.

49. When we see a natural style, we are astonished and charmed; for we expected to see an author, and we find a person.

50. Words differently arranged have a different meaning, and meanings differently arranged have different effects.

51. You always admire what you really don’t understand.

Previously in this series

Part 1 Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Mark Twain

Part 2: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Oscar Wilde

Part 3: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of People Named “W”

Part 4: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Anatole France

Part 5: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Ambrose Bierce

Part 6: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Friedrich Nietzsche

Part 7: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Anon

Part 8: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of People Named “H”

Part 9: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Johann Goethe

Part 10: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Eric Hoffer

Philip Yaffe is a former reporter/feature writer with The Wall Street Journal and a marketing communication consultant. He currently teaches a course in good writing and good speaking in Brussels, Belgium. His recently published book In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking (Almost) like a Professional is available from Story Publishers in Ghent, Belgium (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com).

For further information, contact:

Philip Yaffe
Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 (0)2 660 0405
phil.yaffe@yahoo.com, phil.yaffe@gmail.com

by Philip Yaffe

I am an animal lover. I love all kinds of animal: dogs, cats, horses, rabbits, ferrets, goldfish, etc. So I was lucky to have a very unusual pet when I was a kid.

I grew up in Los Angeles, One day when walking home from school, I saw what looked like a small ball of brown string lying on the sidewalk. When I bent over and picked it up, I saw that it was in fact a baby sparrow that had apparently fallen out of a next somewhere. I looked for the nest but couldn’t find it, so I took him home.

He seemed to be no more than a few days old, so we didn’t believe that he could survive. But we decided to try. We fed him by prying open his beak and inserting diluted milk with an eyedropper. He became stronger, so we then tried feeding in hardboiled egg white. And he started to grow.

We named him Charlie. We didn’t believe in putting a wild bird in a cage, so his home was a shoebox. However, after a few weeks the natural thing happened; he started to fly. At first it was only short distances, from one chair to another. But then he began circling the living room.

We knew the inevitable day when we would have to let him go was now close. I volunteered for the unenviable task. So one morning, I put him in my hands and walked outside. I opened my hands. He remained there for a few seconds, as if trying to decide. Ten he flew away.

If you know the United States, then you know that in many places the telephone lines are not underground but overhead on tall poles. As I was walking home from school, I saw hundreds of sparrows sitting on the telephone wires. On impulse, I called out “Charlie!” Suddenly, one of them flew down from the wires and landed on my shoulder. I’m certain that the other sparrows were amazed, and I was delighted.

This started a regular routine. Every morning I would take Charlie out and he would fly away to be with his friends. But in the evening, he would fly down from the telephone wires onto my shoulder. We would go inside, where he would eat, then spend the evening flying around the living room before finally going to sleep in his shoebox.

I can’t really express what an amazing experience it was to live with this sparrow. But here are a few examples.

Somehow Charlie seemed to know when I had to get up to go to school. Usually just before 7 o’clock I would feel him walking on my forehead as if to say “Wake up. We have things to do!”

Something else about him: Charlie loved pears. I discovered this one day when he literally dive-bombed me to get a piece of the fruit I was eating. After that, we did things differently. I would put a piece of pear between my lips and he would peck away at it until it was small enough for him to fly away with it.

But the best thing was when I was doing my homework, reading or just watching television. Charlie would land on my shoulder, crawl under my collar, and go to sleep. You can’t imagine how pleasant it was to have this warm, feathery body pulsating against my neck.

This went on for about three or four months. But one day when I was walking home from school, I called out “Charlie!”, and nothing happened. I called again, “Charlie”, still nothing. A third time, “Charlie!” I went into the house, but about every 15 or 20 minutes, I went out to try again. “Charlie!” Still nothing. I did this all evening, and several times the next morning before I had to go to school.

I never saw Charlie again. I hoped that he had met his soul mate and they had flown off to live together as sparrows are supposed to.

Living with Charlie was quite an unusual experience and the memory is still fresh. As my friend will tell you, sometimes when we are at an outdoor restaurant and there are sparrows picking at breadcrumbs, I just can’t resist. I quietly call out: “Charlie? Charlie?”

Of course nothing ever happens, and I know it never will. My indelible encounter with Charlie took place nearly 50 years ago. But as the dictum tells us: Any hope, no matter how vain or improbable, is better than no hope at all. So I still do it. Every so often when dining outdoors, I turn to the sparrows picking at breadcrumbs: “Charlie? Charlie? Oh . . . Charlie.”

Philip Yaffe is a former writer with The Wall Street Journal and international marketing communication consultant. He now teaches courses in persuasive communication in Brussels, Belgium. Because his clients use English as a second or third language, his approach to writing and public speaking is somewhat different from other communication coaches. He is the author of In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking (Almost) like a Professional, available from the publisher (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com). Contact: phil.yaffe@yahoo.com, phil.yaffe@gmail.com

by Philip Yaffe

“I know that half the money I spend on advertising is wasted. The problem is, I don’t know which half.”

This succinct resume of the advertiser’s dilemma is often attributed to John Wanamaker, the department store pioneer. Some people prefer to give the credit to Henry Ford, the automobile pioneer, or other favorite business giants. Whoever said it first, it is certain that it has been said thousand and thousand of times since.

The significance of the observation is nothing short of astounding. These are people whose business is investing and harvesting financial assets, yet when it comes to advertising, they freely admit to wasting at least half of their money!

But the observation can be turned on its head. Viewed from this perspective, it means that these same extremely clever and resourceful marketers believe that the power of advertising is so great, even at only 50% effectiveness they still get their money’s worth. This is equally astounding!

The value of advertising can most easily be seen with mass marketed products. For example, a breakfast cereal launches a major advertising campaign; within a few days to weeks the sales figures will reflect the impact of the campaign. With technical and industrial products, the picture is not quite so clear. Few people buy a car or a piece of industrial equipment on impulse. They build up to it over a long period of time, so that the cause-and-effect relationship between advertising and sales is virtually impossible to evaluate.

Nevertheless, advertising is indispensable. So the question is, can you construct advertising campaigns that will assure the best return on investment (ROI), even when that return cannot be directly measured?

The answer is both yes and no. It is “no” if you believe that advertising by nature is more of an art than a science. It is “yes” if you believe that advertising is a combination of both art and science.

It is certainly true that advertising has a major “art” component, i.e. that people who have a “feel” for it are likely to produce better, more effective advertising than people who don’t. Unfortunately, this verity has led to the false conclusion that advertising is predominantly art, i.e. a matter of taste.

When advertising is viewed as largely a question of personal preference, the rational component of the exercise takes second importance. Worse, it often degenerates into a kind of pseudoscience of rules and regulations with no scientific justification:

– Be positive: no one likes negative advertising

– Avoid simple, straightforward headlines; headlines should “tease” readers into the advert

– Use big, bold visuals; people are impressed by pictures

– Show the solution, not the problem: this is reassuring to potential buyers

– Never write more than 15 – 20 words of body copy; no one reads body copy anyhow

– Make payoff lines (slogans) clever and memorable, not explicit and to the point

The summation seems to be: Advertising is entertainment. If you can attract attention and give a show, then you will sell.

One writer on the subject bluntly stated: “Advertising consists of first hitting people in the face with a pie, then delivering your message.” It is of course true that you must attract attention before you can deliver your message. But just how seriously is anyone like to take your message while he is wiping whipped cream off his face?

Advertising may have elements of show business. But if it is only show business, it will fail. On the other hand, if we are more detached in our analysis — i.e. if we put the art of advertising and the science of advertising into better balance — we many learn some valuable lesions. And gain some valuable commercial leverage.

I have done considerably work in pharmaceutical marketing. Doctors are perhaps the most difficult targets in the world, because what you “sell” them is ideas and information, which later on they may or may not turn into prescriptions for their patients. Thus, while the following examples relate specifically to doctors and medicines, the underlying principles are universally valid. Throughout this article, wherever you see the word “doctor”, mentally substitute the name of your potential technical and/or industrial customer and see how well these ideas fit.

Facing the Facts

David Ogilvy, one of the most highly regarded gurus of consumer advertising, asserts: “Very few advertisements contain enough factual information to sell the product. There is a ludicrous tradition among copywriters that consumers aren’t interested in facts. Northing could be farther from the truth.”

If this contention is valid for housewives, how much more valid must it be for doctors!

Medicine is a serious business. When a doctor reads a medical journal, he is looking for medical information. Otherwise, he would be reading something else. It therefore follows: Advertising in medical journals that gives real medical information is likely to attract more attention and achieve better results than advertising which doesn’t.

If this seems self-evident, medical journals bear witness to the opposite. The majority of adverts tend to fall into two categories:

1. Lots of words, but little real information (lack of a focused message).

2. A clever headline, a pleasing picture—and no information at all.

The excuse for the first kind of advert is often: “It is a new product; we need to create a personality for it.” It is hard to imagine how an empty personality, based solely on errant prose, will result in positive promotion.

The excuse for the second category of adverts often is: “It is a well known product; this is simply a reminder advert.” Certainly it makes sense to remind the doctor that a medicine exists. But it makes even more sense to remind him of why he is using it, if he is already using it. Or why he should be using it, if he isn’t.

The 80/20 Rule

The objection will now be raised: Doesn’t this “art + science” concept of advertising necessitate long body copy? Does it make sense to write long body copy when no one reads it anyhow?

Let’s examine this contention in reverse order.

For every 100 doctors who read the headline and look at the visual of an advert, let’s say only 20 will actually read the body. Does this represent an 80% wastage? Emphatically no.

The 80/20 rule is a fundamental tenet of technical and industrial marketing, i.e. in general 80% of sales come from 20% of customers. The same principle applies to advertising.

Readers who just look at the headline and visual, then turn the page, at that moment are not the real customers for the product. Those who remain to read the body copy are the real customers for the product. This is the ideal moment to tell them bout it, because this is when they want to know about it. Otherwise, they too are likely to turn the page and an excellent selling opportunity will be lost.

Body is important, in fact vital, because it is your only real chance to make the sale. But how long should that body copy be?

This is like asking how long is a piece of string. You don’t answer this question by counting the number of words. Rather, you consider the value of the words. The best guide is: If the body copy contains one word more than needed to deliver the message, it is probably too long; if it contains one word less than need to deliver the message, it is definitely too short, regardless of how many words are used!

Of course, it makes no sense to simply print the prescribing information. As Bill Bernbach, a legendary practitioner of consumer advertising, has written: “Be certain that your advertisement says something to the consumer; that it informs and renders a service. Then be certain that it says what it has to say in a way no one has ever said it before.”

Notice the balance in this advice.

First: “Be certain that your advertisement says something to the consumer.” This is advertising as a science. Determining what you want to say about your product and what you ought to say about it are two different things. This is why most good advertising starts with market research. And never lets anything go to press before it has been thoroughly tested.

Second: “Be certain that your advertisement says what it has to say in a way that no one has ever said it before.” This is advertising as an art.

How the advert expresses its message, both visually and verbally, can vary dramatically depending on who is saying it. The total impact the advert will achieve intimately depends on the talents of the art director and the copywriter, the so-called “creates” of the business.

The Use and Abuse of Creativity

Introducing the copywriter and art director into the discussion raises the vexing question of creativity in advertising.

“Creativity” is probably one of the most abused and misused words in English or any other language. As we have seen, some people think it means hitting people in the face with a pie. We have also seen the dangers of this approach. Surprising and shocking people in order to gain their attention can:

– Undermine the credibility of the serious message you are trying to deliver.

– Lead to rapid advertising “wear-out”. You can surprise and shock people only once; after that, you are likely to have no effect. Worse, you may have a negative effect!

Stripped of mythology, saying what you have to say in a way that it has never before been said simply means: Putting forward the essentials of the message in such a way that they cannot be ignored — on the first exposure and on subsequent exposures.

So much emphasis is placed on attracting attention and conveying a message on the first exposure (“pie in the face”), very little thought seems to be given to what will happen, if anything, on the second, third and subsequent exposures. This is the concept of “wear-out”; after how many exposures does the advert stop having any useful impact?

The concept of wear-out is closely allied to the idea of repetition. Unlike supermarket adverts, adverts for prescription pharmaceuticals seldom appear only once (“Buy now before supplies run out; Special discount prices, stock up now”). Instead, they usually run for at least several months, and often a year or longer.

True, few doctors read the same advert more than once, but they cannot help seeing it more than once. They will certainly see it much more often than they will see the pharmaceutical representative who visits them. Advertising is the most frequent and most consistent point of contact between the doctor and the company.

A truly efficient advert should have impact each and every time it is seen — whether it is read each time or not. This is why the fundamental structure is so important. And why it is well worth spending the time and energy to get it right, i.e. concept development not only for journal adverts, but also for brochures, mailings, oral presentations, symposia, etc.

How do you create advertising with such power and longevity?

In general, any advert that communicates the product name and main sell proposition in a flash should continue to work as long as the underlying strategy remains the same. The assumption is, each exposure — even if it is only as long as it takes to turn the page — reinforces previous impressions of the message in the journals, mailings, etc. Adverts that rely on “teaser” headlines or other indirect approaches are more problematical. It is far more likely that the doctor will perceive this kind of advertising as promotion rather than information, and will turn the page with no reinforcement of the selling message.

Courage and Conviction

A truly effective long-life advert may not always appear smashingly striking at first sight; however, if it is well constructed it will grow and gain strength over time. By contrast, an advert that is extremely striking at first sight — this being its major attribute — may in fact lose power over time. Sometimes overnight.

Developing advertisements that sell on first and subsequent exposures admits of no hard and fast rules. Some times it may mean an extremely factual advert that looks almost like editorial copy; other time it may be an advert with a highly emotional content. It all depends on the nature of the product; the nature of the market, and what ideas, true or false, are already in the doctor’s mind.

There is more to good technical and industrial advertising than meets the eye. Indeed, a superficial analysis is likely to be very misleading, with very expensive consequences. To properly evaluate an advertising campaign, it is necessary to know the underlying strategy and the objectives that strategy is designed to achieve.

By way of example, here are the descriptions of three advertising campaigns I produced when I was creative director of a specialized medical advertising agency. You may not fully understand the products, but look closely at the description of each advert.

1. Product: Vasodilator

Objective: Increase prescriptions by repositioning it as the first product of a new, more effective therapeutic class

Headline: “6 Actions on the Blood and the Vessels to Combat Claudication and its Premonitory Symptoms”

Visual: 6 symbols in the form of a rectangle representing the 6 modes of action

Body copy: factual, moderate length

2. Product: Benzodiazepine

Objective: Stabilize leadership position/market share in an anti-benzodiazepine marketing environment

Headline: “My Conditions for Prescribing an Anxiolytic to My Patients”

Visual: Intelligent, serious-looking general practitioner speaking the headline

Body copy: factual, short

3. Beta-2 mimetic bronchodilator

Objective: Maximize sales potential by overcoming market prejudice to using oral beta-2 mimetics in the treatment of nocturnal asthma

Headline: “Asthma: Night Is the Enemy”

Visual: Artist’s impression of the experience of a night-time asthma attack, painted by an asthmatic artist who actually suffers such attacks.

Body copy: factual; extremely short

At first glance the vasodilator and benzodiazepine adverts might appear uninspired, even banal. They are unlikely to win any awards for advertising “creativity”. On the other hand, the asthma advert is exactly the type that could win a creativity award.

Despite their superficial differences, fundamentally they are quire similar. All three adverts had very high awareness and credibility scores. One of the so-called “banal” adverts was so well received — and had such an impact on sales — that when we proposed a more “imaginative” version, the product manager, originally unconvinced by it, growled: “If you touch my advert, I will break your arm.”

Conclusion: All three adverts were extremely creative in the real sense of the word, because they:

1. Clearly reflected the nature of the product

2. Precisely addressed the needs of the market

3. Elicited the desired response (won prescriptions)

The serious advertiser would do well to bear this functional definition of creativity uppermost in mind.

It takes courage to reject an advertising campaign proposal that is striking, cute, funny, artistic, etc., in favor of one that doesn’t seem to possess these desirable characteristics. A so-called “unimaginative” campaign that clearly responds to the needs of the market and has the innate capacity to grow and develop (i.e. continue generating sales) is considerably more creative, in the true sense of the word, than one that flashes like a meteor, then dissipates its energy and loses impact before it has had a chance to do its job.

Philip Yaffe is a former writer with The Wall Street Journal and international marketing communication consultant. He now teaches courses in persuasive communication in Brussels, Belgium. Because his clients use English as a second or third language, his approach to writing and public speaking is somewhat different from other communication coaches. He is the author of In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking (Almost) like a Professional, available from the publisher (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com). Contact: phil.yaffe@yahoo.com, phil.yaffe@gmail.com

by Philip Yaffe

Part 10 of an occasional series

I am a collector of quotations. I have been ever since I learned how to write, I mean professionally, not in primary school.

I am particularly fond of what I like to call “pithy prose”. These short quotations can cover an unlimited variety of subjects: love, religion, politics, human nature, etc. What unites them is their ability to say more in one or two sentences than could be expressed in a thousand-word treatise. It’s like being able to pour a liter of liquid into a half-liter bottle.

They are superb examples of Mark Twain’s famous dictum, “The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.”

In principle, all writers and public speakers are capable of producing pithy prose, but clearly some are better at it than others.

Any collection of pithy prose must necessarily be biased in terms of what it includes and excludes. I make no apologies for my selections, only for the hundreds of other meritorious quotations I had to leave out.

No one will agree with all these quotations; this was not their intention. You may even find some of them repugnant or outrageous. This was their intention.

We seldom learn anything of value from what we already agree with. Only those ideas that grate on our nerves can open our minds. As with oysters, irritation can produce pearls. So if anything you are about to read annoys or shocks you, try to think clearly and dispassionately about what it is saying. You will either be confirmed in your current belief or shaken into re-examining it.

Either way, you win!

This article is part of an occasional series. In each article, I will be offering more amusing, educating, and exasperating quotations to your judgment. But just to be certain that we agree on what we are talking about, here it is in a nutshell.

Pithy Prose: A quotation where at first you may not be quite certain what it means. But when you become certain, you become equally certain that it couldn’t have been said better any other way. In short, big ideas in small packages.

If you have a better definition of pithy prose, please contact me. I would love to hear it.

Who Is Eric Hoffer?

Eric Hoffer (1902 – 1983) was known as “the longshoreman philosopher”. Born in New York City, he was largely unschooled because he became temporarily blind at the age of seven; however, when he regained his sight at the age of 16, he read voraciously. At 18 he went to California, where he became both a migrant farm laborer and a longshoreman (dockworker). “The True Believer” (1951), his first and best known work, is a study of fanaticism and mass movements. It was widely praised for its pungent, aphoristic style and deep sociological insights.

1. A grievance is most poignant when almost redressed.

2. A man by himself is in bad company.

3. Charlatanism of some degree is indispensable to effective leadership.

4. Compassion is the antitoxin of the soul: where there is compassion even the most poisonous impulses remain relatively harmless.

5. Creativity is the ability to introduce order into the randomness of nature.

6. Every intense desire is perhaps a desire to be different from what we are.

7. Every new adjustment is a crisis in self-esteem.

8. Faith in a holy cause is to a considerable extent a substitute for lost faith in ourselves.

7. Far more crucial than what we know or do not know is what we do not want to know.

8. In a time of drastic change it is the learners who inherit the future. The learned usually find themselves equipped to live in a world that no longer exists.

9. It is a sign of creeping inner death when we can no longer praise the living.

10. It is by its promise of a sense of power that evil often attracts the weak.

11. It is easier to love humanity as a whole than to love one’s neighbor.

12. It is not actual suffering but the taste of better things which excites people to revolt.

13. It is not so much the example of others we imitate as the reflection of ourselves in their eyes and the echo of ourselves in their words.

14. It is often the failure who is the pioneer in new lands, new undertakings, and new forms of expression.

15. It is remarkable by how much a pinch of malice enhances the penetrating power of an idea or an opinion. Our ears, it seems, are wonderfully attuned to sneers and evil reports about our fellow men.

16. It is the around-the-corner brand of hope that prompts people to action, while the distant hope acts as an opiate.

17. It is the malady of our age that the young are so busy teaching us that they have no time left to learn.

18. It sometimes seems that intense desire creates not only its own opportunities, but its own talents.

19. It still holds true that man is most uniquely human when he turns obstacles into opportunities.

20. Kindness can become its own motive. We are made kind by being kind.

21. Man is the only creature that strives to surpass himself, and yearns for the impossible.

22. Many of the insights of the saint stem from their experience as sinners.

23. Men weary as much of not doing the things they want to do as of doing the things they do not want to do.

24. Nationalist pride, like other variants of pride, can be a substitute for self-respect.

25. Our frustration is greater when we have much and want more than when we have nothing and want some. We are less dissatisfied when we lack many things than when we seem to lack but one thing.

26. Our sense of power is more vivid when we break a man’s spirit than when we win his heart.

27. People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them.

28. Propaganda does not deceive people; it merely helps them to deceive themselves.

29. Rudeness is a weak imitation of strength.

30. Social improvement is attained more readily by a concern with the quality of results than with the purity of motives.

31. Someone who thinks the world is always cheating him is right. He is missing that wonderful feeling of trust in someone or something.

32. Sometimes we feel the loss of a prejudice as a loss of vigor.

33. Take away hatred from some people, and you have men without faith.

34. The beginning of thought is in disagreement – not only with others but also with ourselves.

35. The fear of becoming a ‘has-been’ keeps some people from becoming anything.

36. The greatest weariness comes from work not done.

37. The hardest arithmetic to master is that which enables us to count our blessings.

38. The only way to predict the future is to have power to shape the future.

39. The savior who wants to turn men into angels is as much a hater of human nature as the totalitarian despot who wants to turn them into puppets.

40. The search for happiness is one of the chief sources of unhappiness.

41. The weakness of a soul is proportionate to the number of truths that must be kept from it.

42. There are no chaste minds. Minds copulate wherever they meet.

43. There would be no society if living together depended upon understanding each other.

44. Those in possession of absolute power cannot only prophesy and make their prophecies come true, but they can also lie and make their lies come true.

45. Thought is a process of exaggeration. The refusal to exaggerate is not infrequently an alibi for the disinclination to think or praise.

46. To know a person’s religion we need not listen to his profession of faith but must find his brand of intolerance.

47. To spell out the obvious is often to call it in question.

48. To the old, the new is usually bad news.

49. We are least open to precise knowledge concerning the things we are most vehement about.

50. We are more prone to generalize the bad than the good. We assume that the bad is more potent and contagious.

51. We can be absolutely certain only about things we do not understand.

52. We have rudiments of reverence for the human body, but we consider as nothing the rape of the human mind.

53. When people are bored it is primarily with themselves.

54. When people are free to do as they please, they usually imitate each other.

55. Wise living consists perhaps less in acquiring good habits than in acquiring as few habits as possible.

56. You can discover what your enemy fears most by observing the means he uses to frighten you.

57. You can never get enough of what you don’t need to make you happy.

Previously in this series

Part 1 Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Mark Twain

Part 2: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Oscar Wilde

Part 3: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of People Named “W”

Part 4: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Anatole France

Part 5: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Ambrose Bierce

Part 6: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Friedrich Nietzsche

Part 7: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Anon

Part 8: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of People Named “H”

Part 9: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Johann Goethe

Philip Yaffe is a former reporter/feature writer with The Wall Street Journal and a marketing communication consultant. He currently teaches a course in good writing and good speaking in Brussels, Belgium. His recently published book In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking (Almost) like a Professional is available from Story Publishers in Ghent, Belgium (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com).

For further information, contact:

Philip Yaffe
Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 (0)2 660 0405
phil.yaffe@yahoo.com, phil.yaffe@gmail.com

by Philip Yaffe

I am usually very reticent about offering writing tips. Unless they are linked to the absolute, inescapable fundamental principles of good writing, such tips are too often poorly applied or misapplied.

There is really only a handful of fundamental writing principles. Before this extraordinary tip can be properly revealed, we need to review three of them: 1) clarity, 2) conciseness, and 3) density.

Clarity and conciseness are generally well known, density less so. However, for most writers these are just “weasel words”, i.e. they seem to say something but actually say nothing.

For example, how can you know if your text is truly clear? You are far from being the best judge. After all, you wrote it so it should be clear to you, but will it be clear to your readers? Likewise, how can you know if your text is truly concise? Not by counting the words. My dictionary defines concise as “short, clear, and to the point”. “Short” is only part of the definition, so by itself counting words cannot be the whole answer.

Fortunately, it is possible to give these three fundamental writing principles functional definitions, with almost mathematical rigor, so you can actually test your text. If it passes the test, you are well on your way to producing an outstanding document. If not, you need to do some serious rewriting.

• Clarity. For your text to truly clear, you must:

1. Emphasize what is primary importance

2. De-emphasize what is of secondary importance

3. Eliminate what is of no importance

• Conciseness. For your text to be truly concise, you must ensure that it is:

1. As long as necessary

2. As short as possible

• Density. For your text to be truly dense, i.e. devoid of weasel words, you must ensure that it contains:

1. Precise information

2. Logically linked

If you are not fully conversant with these three fundamental principles of good writing, I would invite you to read two other articles available on the Web: “Fixing the Flaws in the 10 Principles of Clear Writing” and “How to Apply the Three Acid Tests of Persuasive Writing”.

Exceptional Tip

Assuming you are largely conversant with these fundamental principles of good writing, I am about to reveal this remarkably exceptional tip. It is so remarkable because in one way or another it affects and advances clarity, conciseness, and density, which are basic objectives. It is also remarkable because it is very little known. Whenever I do a Web search for writing tips, it almost never occurs.

Here it is: Fully benefit from the two hotspots in each and every sentence you write.

Hotspots? Yes. You may never have noticed it, but words at the beginning and at the end of a sentence have stronger emphasis than those in the middle. Therefore, by putting important information in these key locations, you aid reader comprehension.

Here’s an example to demonstrate how hotspots work. While considering the following three sentences, bear in mind that hotspots don’t have equal value. In general, the one at the end of a sentence is somewhat more forceful than the one at the beginning.

A. Astronomers hunting for evidence of life outside of our solar system announced discovery of a new class of planets yesterday.

B. Yesterday astronomers hunting for evidence of life outside of our solar system announced discovery of a new class of planets.

C. Astronomers hunting for evidence of life outside of our solar system yesterday announced discovery of a new class of planets.

I hope you will agree that sentence A says what it has to say. But sentence B is rather better. And sentence C is best of all. Why?

In A, we see that “yesterday”, the time of the announcement, is in the hotspot at the end of the sentence. However, knowing when the announcement was made is hardly as important as the announcement itself. Moving “yesterday” to the hotspot at the beginning in sentence B somewhat helps, but the time of the announcement is still very much a detail.

Sentence C puts “yesterday” in the middle, where such a minor detail belongs. This leaves the hotspots at the beginning and end free to convey truly key information.

Let’s look at another example.

A. The national leaders met to discuss new trade relations between their two countries in the Royal Palace

B. In the Royal Palace the national leaders met to discuss new trade relations between their two countries.

C. The national leaders met in the Royal Palace to discuss new trade relations between their two countries.

Here, the disturbing minor element is the phrase “in the Royal Palace“. Once again we see that moving it from the end of A to the beginning of B is an improvement. However, putting it in the middle of C is best of all.

Now try the technique yourself. Consider the following: “BBX is an agency born with the Swedish Internet in 1996.” In this sentence the date1996 comes at the end. Rewrite it to put the date in the middle. I think you will agree that so doing makes the sentence clearer and more powerful.

We must be careful not to take the terms “beginning of the sentence” and “end of the sentence” too literally. Sentences often start or finish with a kind of explanatory phrase. At the beginning the phrase acts to introduce the main clause; at the end it acts to reinforce the main clause. But it is the main clause that must always be the focus of our interest.

For example: Having arrived late at the party, Jane immediately looked for the hostess to apologize. The main clause is “Jane immediately looked for the hostess to apologize.” Likewise: The current financial difficulties are well under control, said the company’s spokesman. Here the main clause is “The current financial difficulties are well under control.”

Now that you see the power of this extremely important tip, from now on pay close attention to how you order your words. If you fully benefit from the two hotspots in each and every sentence you write, you will see immediate and substantial improvement in the clarity, conciseness, and density of each and every text you produce.

Philip Yaffe is a former reporter/feature writer with The Wall Street Journal and a marketing communication consultant. He currently teaches a course in good writing and good speaking in Brussels, Belgium. His recently published book In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking (Almost) like a Professional is available from Story Publishers in Ghent, Belgium (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com).

For further information, contact:

Philip Yaffe

Brussels, Belgium

Tel: +32 (0)2 660 0405

phil.yaffe@yahoo.com, phil.yaffe@gmail.com

by Philip Yaffe

According to the adage, “Travel is broadening”. In other words, when you leave your home and go somewhere else, your mind will expand because of the differences you will see. For me, the most valuable, mind-expanding differences are not the big ones that you might be prepared for by reading and education. They the little things that you would never even consider, so that they take you completely by surprise.

When I was growing up in Los Angeles, I never traveled because my parents were small business owners and had no time to go away for vacation. I was in fact 16 years old the first time I set foot outside of Southern California. After 10 years of planning and disappointments, we finally drove across the country to visit relatives who lived in a small town in Maine.

A few days before our departure, I came down with a severe case of mononucleosis. This illness makes you incredibly weak and constantly tired, so all you want to do is sleep. We just about decided not to go, but since it was a trip we had been planning for decade, we decided to give it a try.

After three days on the road (I had spent most of the time sleeping on the back seat), we arrived in St. Louis, where we also had relatives. St. Louis is on the Mississippi River and this was early July. If you know anything about St. Louis, you know it is an excellent place not to be in summer. It was extremely hot and extremely humid. However, since this was the first time — and probably the last time — I would ever see these relatives, I spent the next four days touring the city, picnicking, swimming, playing tennis, and engaging in a host of other strenuous activities.

Within a half-hour after leaving St. Louis, I completely collapsed and slept almost constantly the next two days before arriving in New York. The four days in St. Louis were a revelation. Before arriving, I could hardly move; after leaving I could hardly move. But while there, I was active beyond all expectations. I simply had never imagined just how much a person can actually achieve through sheer desire and will power.

A couple of weeks later, we were visiting with my Aunt and Uncle in Maine. One day my brother and I were walking around the town just to see what it looked like. We went into a local supermarket. Our attention was drawn to a big display of watermelons. Two things struck us. First, they didn’t look like the watermelons we had in California. Instead of being big and oval, they were long and sausage-like. But the real shocker was the price. You will have to adjust the figures; after all, this was a half-century ago (1958). The sign said 10 cent a pound. My brother let out a cry of dismay. “Ten cents a pound! That’s robbery!”

A man who was standing a short distance away came over and asked him, “Tell me son, where are you from?” “California.” “And what do you pay for watermelons this time of year?” “Oh, about 2 cents a pound, sometimes 1 cent a pound.”

The man looked my brother straight in the eyes and said, “Little boy, you’re lying to me. You’re lying. You’re lying”. It was a case of total incomprehension. The man simply couldn’t believe how cheap watermelons were in California. And we simply couldn’t believe how expensive they were in Maine.

However, the pièce de résistance of my revelations happened a few days later. We were on a lake, swimming, boating and barbequing when a thunder storm broke. Everyone ran into the house to get out of the rain. Everyone but me. I was transfixed, literally rooted to the spot. I stood there with the rain pouring down on me for what seemed like several minutes before I too finally ran into the house.

Why this strange reaction?

You need to understand that in Los Angeles, it is normal that not a single drop of rain falls in the city from about the first of May until the end of September. Because it was the only thing I had ever experienced, I grew up believing the word “summer” literally meant “hot and dry”. It was August, and it was raining! To me, this was against nature. It was like the sun one day suddenly rising in the west and setting in the east, rather than rising in the east and setting in the west as it had always done.

When I got back to Los Angeles, I was a changed person. Being a scientist by nature — I loved mathematics and physics — I was naturally skeptical about things. But I had not fully realized just how much there was to be skeptical about. Having experienced somewhere else, I better understood that things that seem normal and natural in one environment can be bizarre and unnatural in another.

This revelation has served me well ever since. It certainly helped me a few years later when I spent two-and-a-half years in Tanzania, in the East African bush. This was an environment not only different from Los Angeles, but different almost beyond imagination. I virtually lived in a mud hut, suffered through a drought, saw leprosy, and contracted both malaria and dysentery.

But the most surprising thing was, Tanzania had a one-party socialist government. Being a devout believer in multi-party, free enterprise democracy, this was an anathema to me. However once on site, I discovered that Tanzania‘s one-party, socialist state not only worked, but for this poor developing country, this “bizarre” form of government was absolutely necessary.

The world is full of unexpected things. The best way to deal with them is to “anticipate the unexpected”. In others words, we must always be prepared to examine something that surprises us before criticizing or rejecting it. Otherwise, we are likely to make some serious mistakes of judgment.

I think the importance of this lesson was best summed up by a country preacher in the American Deep South. In his distinctive southern drawl, he once told his congregation: “It ain’t what you don’t know that causes problems. It’s what you do know that just ain’t so.” Amen.

Philip Yaffe is a former reporter/feature writer with The Wall Street Journal and a marketing communication consultant. He currently teaches a course in good writing and good speaking in Brussels, Belgium. His recently published book In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking (Almost) like a Professional is available from Story Publishers in Ghent, Belgium (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com).

For further information, contact:

Philip Yaffe
Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 (0)2 660 0405
phil.yaffe@yahoo.com, phil.yaffe@gmail.com

by Philip Yaffe

If saying that good grammar can spoil good writing sounds like heresy, it was meant to.

When I search the Web for writing tips, all too often the first bit of advice that comes back is “Be sure to use good grammar”. But that’s putting the cart before the horse. It’s like telling a carpenter which hammer to use to drive in a particular type of nail. Very useful advice. However, this is a detail. It is valid only if the carpenter knows why he is putting the nail there and what will follow.

There is a second reason why this bit of advice is misplaced. One person’s idea of good grammar is not necessarily another’s.

The English language is not blessed (or cursed) with the equivalent of the Académie Française, a more or less official body in France that regulates the French language. Differences about correct grammar are sometimes hotly argued within the Académie, but outside their decisions are accepted as law.

English grammarians also are continually arguing with each other. There is of course broad agreement on many things. However, when there isn’t, you can pretty much do as you like.

Over my 40-year career as a writer, I have purposely chosen to “violate” some aspects of English grammar that many people consider to be inviolable. Why? Because I believe their rigorous application often impedes emphasis and/or understanding.

I would like to share some of these with you. You may never have thought about them before, so here is your opportunity. Once you have reflected on the matters, you may accept or reject them as the mood takes you.

Although a native of Southern California, I have been living in Brussels, Belgium, for the past 34 years. In Europe, British English is generally preferred to American English, so I am quite accustomed to seeing the language used somewhat differently from what I knew before I came here.

Past vs. Present Tense

One of my particular pet peeves is something I hear daily on the BBC, the prestigious British Broadcasting Corporation. This is not a condemnation of British vs. American English. It’s just that I became aware of the practice while listening to the BBC. Americans do pretty much the same thing.

What am I talking about? The annoying, even ludicrous stricture that if a sentence starts in the past tense, it must remain in the past tense.

For example: The United Nations this morning reported that malaria “was” still a worldwide health menace. To me, it makes much more sense to say: The United Nations this morning disclosed that malaria “is” still a worldwide health menace.

Or what about this: The President asserted that the economy “was” going to remain strong at least until 2011. Again, it makes much more sense to say: The President asserted that the economy “is” going to remain strong at least until 2010.

This practice is relatively harmless; nevertheless, I cringe at it. Clearly, the speaker didn’t mean to suggest that the situation was likely to change almost the instant he had uttered his statement. He was projecting into the future. So while he may have said it five minutes ago (past tense), it seems ludicrous to paraphrase his statement in the past tense, which only diminishes its force.

If you believe that casting the beginning of a sentence in the past tense, then the rest in the present or future tense is bad grammar, you are in poor company. When the logic of the situation calls for it, many good writers and speakers ignore the “rule”. The above examples were in fact taken from two the world’s leading international daily newspapers.

Capitalizing Bullet Points

The purpose of bullet points is to make thoughts and information stand out. So why go against the current by not capitalizing the first letter of each point? For example:

A.

Our system helps people:

– write better;

– write faster;

– write persuasively;

– reduce errors;

– reduce formatting problems.

B.

Our system helps people:

– Write better

– Write faster

– Write persuasively

– Reduce errors

– Reduce formatting problems

You will notice that in addition to capitalizing each bullet point, example B also eliminates the semi-colons and the period. What logic is there for putting in commas semi-colons, and periods? The fact that the next line is a new bullet point, i.e. clearly a new thought, makes such punctuation unnecessary, and even distracting.

Of course, it can be contended that each bullet point is a continuation of the main sentence, so starting with a capital would be incorrect. Likewise, each bullet point is the end of a thought, so punctuation is necessary. Valid arguments, for a grammarian. However, for a writer whatever weakens the power of bullet points negates the reason for using them in the first place. Failure to capitalize and inserting punctuation both tend to weaken bullets points, and therefore should be avoided

Names and Titles

My final grammatical pet peeve may not be grammatical at all. It has to do with how people are introduced in a document. I am not certain there is any “rule” governing this; it is more a matter of choice.

A.

The president of the International Federation of Tuba Players, John Jones, has just celebrated his 18^th year of service

B.

John Jones, president of the International Federation of Tuba Players, has just celebrated his 18^th year of service

Both A and B are legitimate ways of introducing John Johns. Some good writers choose the one, some choose the other. I would like to argue that in most cases, B is probably preferable because it is more “natural”. After all, at a party you wouldn’t say to someone, “I would like to introduce you to the president of the International Federation of Tuba Players, John Jones.” Preferably you would say, “I would like to introduce you to John Jones, president of the International Federation of Tuba Players.”

Paragraphing

This article is full of a heresy that many grammarians would be happy to chastise me for — and have.

You may have noticed that many of the paragraphs are quite short, even only one sentence. I am certain that you didn’t learn paragraphing like this in school and would have been marked down if you had tried it.

Some people who use “ungrammatically” short paragraphs claim that they help maintain reader interest, because readers dislike large blocks of text. This is true. However, there is an even better reason for using them. Short paragraphs help to dramatize certain key idea, thereby enhancing clarity.

This first paragraph of this section is a case in point.

The sentence starting “This article is full of a heresy that . . .” could easily have been combined with the next sentence starting “You may have noticed that many of the paragraphs are quite short . . .” to form a single paragraph. This is probably what most grammarians would do and insist that others do, as well. However, some of the emphasis of that first sentence would have been lost, to the detriment of clarity.

If you have doubts about using such unorthodox paragraphing, look any leading newspapers and magazine for reassurance. Short, dramatic paragraphing is one of the things that make these popular publications so easy and enjoyable to read.

Philip Yaffe is a former reporter/feature writer with The Wall Street Journal and a marketing communication consultant. He currently teaches a course in good writing and good speaking in Brussels, Belgium. His recently published book In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking (Almost) like a Professional is available from Story Publishers in Ghent, Belgium (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com).

For further information, contact:

Philip Yaffe
Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 (0)2 660 0405
phil.yaffe@yahoo.com, phil.yaffe@gmail.com

by Philip Yaffe

This is a story about a young man growing up in Los Angeles in the 1950s. He was a bit strange for a Californian of that epoch. He of course loved surfing, but he loved mathematics and physics even more. His dream from a very young age was to go to university and get a science degree. And that’s what he did.

In 1960 he enrolled at University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA). At that time (I imagine it is still the case), in addition to their choosing a major, university students were required to take so-called “cross curriculum” classes in other disciplines. In particular, at UCLA everyone was required to study a language.

This young man chose German because it was a language of science. This was a mistake. Not only is German a very difficult language compared to English, it is almost impossible to learn any language if you are exposed to it only in the classroom. This of course is the case in the United States, and in particular at that time English was so dominate that outside the classroom you would never hear German, or virtually any other language. Spanish in California was of course an exception; however, in the 1960s it was no where near as important as it is today.

Although the professor insisted that “Sie werden Deutsch lernen!” (You will learn German), our young man was not so certain. “Particle physics and differential topology are not easy subjects, but German is impossible. I spend more time and effort on this class and get less out of it than any other class I have.”

The professor of course was wrong. The young man didn’t learn German, and probably neither did anyone else. All he knew was that he was extremely relieved when the course was finished.

When he graduated, the young man joined the Peace Corps, the U.S. government organization established by President Kennedy to send volunteers to Third World countries to help them with their nation building. The young man was assigned to Tanzania in East Africa. As part of their preparation, all volunteers heading to Tanzania were required to study Swahili, the national language, three hours a day, six days a week for nine weeks.

“At last a language I will actually be able to use!” the young man exulted. So he really threw himself into it. He intensely studied every aspect of Swahili, grammar, vocabulary, syntax, diction, idiomatic expressions, etc. He was unquestionably the best student in the class.

When the volunteers got to Dar es Salaam, then the Tanzanian capital, four of them were put on a train and sent to posts in the middle of the country. At each stop, vendors swarmed around the train to sell bananas, tangerines, oranges and other local produce. With some difficulty, the young man was able to speak to the vendors, but he couldn’t understand their replies.

One of the other members of the group had unquestionably been the poorest Swahili student. At the end of the nine weeks, she could barely say “hujambo” (hello), yet somehow she understood what the vendors were saying. So the young man would speak, the vendors would reply, she would translate, and he would speak again.

“But this makes no sense. How can you understand them when I can’t?” he asked. “I don’t know,” she replied. “I guess I just listen to what they are saying.” Suddenly, he realized that his approach to languages had been academic, not practical. He was listening for conjugations, singulars and plurals, inverted verbs and other grammatical constructs, but not to what people were actually saying.

Once he recognized this, his progress was blindingly rapid. Within a very few weeks, he found that he was no longer translating through English. He was actually thinking and speaking directly in Swahili.

“It was like being released from prison. I saw my cell door swinging open and my mind being set free to fly out. I could literally feel my brain expanding!” the young man explains.

He now lives in Belgium and has gone on to master French, has a working knowledge of Dutch and German, and is currently turning his attention to Spanish.

“You know,” he says, “I used to be jealous of people who learned other languages as a child, not as an adult. But now I’m not so certain. I was 24 before I learned a second language. It wasn’t easy; in fact it was excruciatingly difficult. However, I had an experience that people who grow up speaking other languages cannot even begin to imagine. Looking back on it, I don’t think I would really want to change that.”

I was that young man. I am no longer so young; all of this happened more than 40 years ago. Having had four decades to reflect on it, I am now convinced that this life-altering experience firmly demonstrated two things.

First, under the proper circumstances, anyone can learn to speak other languages. Having grown up in a country as big as a continent with a single dominant language, I had fallen victim to the idea that learning other languages required high intelligence and/or special gifts. I am extremely happy to have discovered otherwise.

Secondly, I believe that the way languages are taught in the U.S. is all wrong. The objective of teaching students to speak the language is manifestly false. They won’t, because in most cases opportunities to use the language are lacking. Pursuing this objective therefore only demoralizes students and turns them against language learning per se.

American educators need to recognize that the best they can do is to acquaint students with a language and lay a foundation for them to rapidly start speaking it if they ever find themselves in a place where the language is actually spoken.

Language courses should teach basic grammar passively, i.e. so that students can easily recognize verb conjugations, singulars and plurals, formal and familiar pronouns, etc., then concentrate on helping students to comfortably read in the language, e.g. newspapers, magazines, novels, etc. If students know how to read a language, once they finish the course they might continue reading it, thus keeping their knowledge grammar and vocabulary fresh and ready to use should the opportunity ever arise.

Under current conditions, the moment they leave compulsory language courses, most students immediately forget whatever it is they might have learned, so everything is lost.

My own experience demonstrates the value of this approach. When I had mastered Swahili — and realized that I could master any other language I wanted to — I decided to try my hand at French. With some effort, I taught myself to read French while still living in Tanzania. When I returned to Los Angeles, I continued reading newspapers, magazines, and novels in French, so five years later when I moved to Belgium, I began speaking it almost immediately.

I am currently doing the same thing with Spanish. I have essentially no opportunity to speak Spanish in Belgium, but I now read it almost fluently. I occasionally spend a week on vacation to Spain. Each time I do, it takes only one or two days for my mind to switch to Spanish mode, so that I can begin speaking. Not fluently, but enough to get around. I am certain that if I were to spend a month or so in Spain, I would rapidly approach fluency.

Philip Yaffe is a former reporter/feature writer with The Wall Street Journal and a marketing communication consultant. He currently teaches a course in good writing and good speaking in Brussels, Belgium. His recently published book In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking (Almost) like a Professional is available from Story Publishers in Ghent, Belgium (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com).

For further information, contact:

Philip Yaffe
Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 (0)2 660 0405
phil.yaffe@yahoo.com, phil.yaffe@gmail.com

by Philip Yaffe

Part 9 of an occasional series

I am a collector of quotations. I have been ever since I learned how to write, I mean professionally, not in primary school.

I am particularly fond of what I like to call “pithy prose”. These short quotations can cover an unlimited variety of subjects: love, religion, politics, human nature, etc. What unites them is their ability to say more in one or two sentences than could be expressed in a thousand-word treatise. It’s like being able to pour a liter of liquid into a half-liter bottle.

They are superb examples of Mark Twain’s famous dictum, “The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.”

In principle, all writers and public speakers are capable of producing pithy prose, but clearly some are better at it than others.

Any collection of pithy prose must necessarily be biased in terms of what it includes and excludes. I make no apologies for my selections, only for the hundreds of other meritorious quotations I had to leave out.

No one will agree with all these quotations; this was not their intention. You may even find some of them repugnant or outrageous. This was their intention.

We seldom learn anything of value from what we already agree with. Only those ideas that grate on our nerves can open our minds. As with oysters, irritation can produce pearls. So if anything you are about to read annoys or shocks you, try to think clearly and dispassionately about what it is saying. You will either be confirmed in your current belief or shaken into re-examining it.

Either way, you win!

This article is part of an occasional series. In each article, I will be offering more amusing, educating, and exasperating quotations to your judgment. But just to be certain that we agree on what we are talking about, here it is in a nutshell.

Pithy Prose: A quotation where at first you may not be quite certain what it means. But when you become certain, you become equally certain that it couldn’t have been said better any other way. In short, big ideas in small packages.

If you have a better definition of pithy prose, please contact me. I would love to hear it.

Who Is Johann Goethe?

Johann Goethe (1749 – 1812), whose full name was Johann Wolfgang van Goethe, was a German poet, novelist, playwright, and natural philosopher. He gained early fame with his novel “The Sorrows of Young Werther”, but his most famous work is the poetic drama “Faust”. As a natural philosopher, Goethe made important discoveries about plant and animal life. His unorthodox, non-Newtonian theory of light and color strongly influenced a number of later abstract painters.

1. A clever man commits no minor blunders.

2. A noble person attracts noble people, and knows how to hold on to them.

3. A person hears only what he understands.

4. A person places himself on a level with the ones he praises.

5. A useless life is an early death.

6. Age merely shows what children we remain.

7. All intelligent thoughts have already been thought; what is necessary is only to try to think them again.

8. All the knowledge I possess everyone else can acquire, but my heart is all my own.

9. As soon as you trust yourself, you will know how to live.

10. Be generous with kindly words, especially about those who are absent.

11. Beauty is a manifestation of secret natural laws, which otherwise would have been hidden from us forever.

12. Certain defects are necessary for the existence of individuality.

13. Character develops itself in the stream of life.

14. Common sense is the genius of humanity.

15. Correction does much, but encouragement does more.

16. Deeply earnest and thoughtful people stand on shaky footing with the public.

17. Destiny grants us our wishes, but in its own way, in order to give us something beyond our wishes.

18. Do not give in too much to feelings. An overly sensitive heart is an unhappy possession on this shaky earth.

19. Dream no small dreams, for they have no power to move the hearts of men.

20. Error is acceptable as long as we are young; but one must not drag it along into old age.

21. Every author in some way portrays himself in his works, even if it be against his will.

22. Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words.

23. Everybody wants to be somebody; nobody wants to grow.

24. Everything in the world may be endured except continual prosperity.

25. Few people have the imagination for reality.

26. For a man to achieve all that is demanded of him, he must regard himself as greater than he is.

27. Hatred is active, and envy passive dislike; there is but one step from envy to hate.


28. He who does not think much of himself is much more esteemed than he imagines.

29. He who possesses art and science has religion; he who does not possess them, needs religion.

30. I do not know myself, and God forbid that I should.

31. I will listen to anyone’s convictions, but pray keep your doubts to yourself.

32. If you start to think of your physical and moral condition, you usually find that you are sick.

33. Ignorant men raise questions that wise men answered a thousand years ago.

34. In the realm of ideas everything depends on enthusiasm… in the real world all rests on perseverance.

35. Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Willing is not enough; we must do.

36. Life belongs to the living, and he who lives must be prepared for changes.

37. Life is the childhood of our immortality.

38. Love can do much, but duty more.

39. Love does not dominate; it cultivates.

40. Men show their character in nothing more clearly than what they think laughable.

41. Nature knows no pause in progress and development, and attaches her curse on all inaction.

42. No one would talk much in society if they knew how often they misunderstood others.

43. None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.

44. Nothing is more fearful than imagination without taste.

45. Nothing is more terrible than to see ignorance in action.

46. Self-knowledge comes from knowing other men.

47. Superstition is the poetry of life.

48. Talent develops in quiet places, character in the full current of human life.

49. The best government is that which teaches us to govern ourselves.

50. The coward only threatens when he is safe.

51. The hardest thing to see is what is in front of your eyes.

52. The little man is still a man.

53. The man with insight enough to admit his limitations comes nearest to perfection.

54. There is nothing so terrible as activity without insight.

55. To rule is easy, to govern difficult.

56. We are never further from what we wish than when we believe that we have what we wished for.

57. We know accurately only when we know little, with knowledge doubt increases.

58. What by a straight path cannot be reached by crooked ways is never won.

59. What is not started today is never finished tomorrow.


60. Whatever you cannot understand, you cannot possess.

61. When ideas fail, words come in very handy.

62. Whoever wishes to keep a secret must hide the fact that he possesses one.

63. Wisdom is found only in truth.

Previously in this Series

Part 1: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Mark Twain

Part 2: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Oscar Wilde

Part 3: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of People Named “W”

Part 4: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Anatole France

Part 5: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Ambrose Bierce

Part 6: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Friedrich Nietzsche

Part 7: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of People Name “H”

Part 8: Pithy Prose: The Wit & Wisdom of Anon

Philip Yaffe is a former reporter/feature writer with The Wall Street Journal and a marketing communication consultant. He currently teaches a course in good writing and good speaking in Brussels, Belgium. His recently published book In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking (Almost) like a Professional is available from Story Publishers in Ghent, Belgium (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com).

For further information, contact:

Philip Yaffe
Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 (0)2 660 0405
phil.yaffe@yahoo.com, phil.yaffe@gmail.com

by Philip Yaffe

It is a widely accepted adage that, “The older you get, the faster time seems to go.” But why should aging have this effect? After all, there is the parallel adage that, “Time flies when you are having fun.” But as we age, time flies whether we are having fun or not.

So what’s going on?

I have recently been trying to understand the phenomenon, because for the past several years many of my days have been extremely long, yet the years still seem to be accelerating.

To tackle the problem, I did an Internet search to see what others were saying on the subject. Nearly all the returns had to do with parenting. “Oh, they grow up so fast. The days are long, but the years are short.” This is perhaps a partial explanation; however, since the phenomenon occurs just as well to people who have no children, it cannot be the whole answer.

Some other comments had to do with getting religion. “I found God at the age of 30 and every day since I have been waiting to go to His kingdom. I am now in my 80s. Oh, the days have been so long, but the years have been so short.” Again perhaps a partial explanation; however, since the phenomenon occurs just as well to non-believers as believers, it cannot be the whole answer either.

Many comments were philosophical. They said simply to accept the phenomenon and live each day to the full. Good advice, but again no advance in understanding.

I then turned to science. I typed in the search words “psychology of time”. This turned up hundreds of articles, most of which were very technical, dealing with brain structure and functions, neurotransmitters and the like. To narrow the search, I typed in both “psychology of time” and “days are long”. And got nothing at all!

Finally, I decided to sit quietly and ponder the matter myself. This turned about to be a wise decision, because I think I found the solution. It’s really quite simple. It all has to do with “anticipation” and “retrospection”.

Whatever the nature of our individual lives, we all anticipate things important to us. Then after they happen, we look back at them. For example, most school children look forward to the long summer vacation, which always seems to be an eternity away. Finally, it arrives. Then, almost before they blink an eye, it’s over and they are back in school again.

Progressing from primary school to secondary school is another excruciating anticipation for a youngster, especially if the move is perceived as being an important step away from childhood into adulthood.

And so it goes. When anticipated, each new significant event seems to be excruciatingly far away. However, after the event, we regularly look back and exclaim. “Did it really happen that long ago?”

Our first love, our first heartbreak, driving a car, landing a job, marriage, etc. When we look forward, all these milestones seem impossibly far in the future. However once achieved, how quickly they recede into the past.

The older we get, the more milestones we have to look back on. So the farther and faster they appear to recede. So if sometimes the clock may seem to have stopped, the calendar always continues racing ahead.

For me, the high point of my life was joining the Peace Corps and serving as a volunteer teacher of math, physics, and journalism in Tanzania. I applied for a Peace Corps posting early in my senior year at UCLA. Processing the application took only about three months — perhaps the longest three months of my life. It seemed more like three years. I was accepted and sent abroad for two years – the shortest two years of my life, because I was having so much fun.

When I returned to Los Angeles, I could hardly believe the adventure was already over. The first week back seemed extremely long, because my heart was still beating 10,000 miles away. However, the weeks rapidly became shorter and shorter, then the first year, then the second year, and so on. I couldn’t believe it when the first decade had passed, then the second, and so on.

I went to Africa with the Peace Corps in 1965 and returned in 1967. More than 40 years ago!

I of course have had many other milestones in my life, which are all rapidly hurtling away from me. Even the most recent ones already seem to be covered in dust. I am now 65. I don’t feel old, but somehow I just can’t get my mind around the fact that many of these things already look like ancient history.

If accumulating milestones is truly the secret of the accelerating years, what do we do about it? Basically nothing; we just have to accept it. However, this is not necessarily a negative. True, the good things are coursing away faster and faster into the past. But so are the not-so-good things.

The story is told of the biblical King Solomon. He once called his wise men together and presented them with a challenge. “Find me a cure for depression.” They meditated for a long time, then gave him the following advice. “Your Majesty, make yourself a ring and have engraved thereon the words: This too shall pass.” He had the ring made and wore it constantly. Every time he felt sad or depressed, he looked at the inscription, which tended to lift his spirits.

“This too shall pass.” Indeed, it shall. Whether positive or negative, nothing in life lasts forever, even if it sometimes feels as if it will. We are certain of this because we know even life itself doesn’t last forever.

We are all born to die. What happens after that is the subject of considerable controversy. But whatever it is, we are certain it is going to happen, and that it will almost certainly be different from whatever we know today.

Since I am now in my seventh decade (I am 65), for me this inevitability will probably occur sometime within the next 20-30 years, and almost certainly within the next 40 years. This seems like a very long time. However, the years are accelerating, so when it does occur my most probably reaction will be: “What! Already!”

Philip Yaffe is a former reporter/feature writer with The Wall Street Journal and a marketing communication consultant. He currently teaches a course in good writing and good speaking in Brussels, Belgium. His recently published book In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking (Almost) like a Professional is available from Story Publishers in Ghent, Belgium (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com).

For further information, contact:

Philip Yaffe

Brussels, Belgium

Tel: +32 (0)2 660 0405

Email: phil.yaffe@yahoo.com,phil.yaffe@gmail.com