Art of Simplicity
Back from a 2 day conference on Media & Communication in Tehran (below photo), on our way to train station, I and some of my friends were speaking about the topics of conference. The discussion led to a debate on different philosophies of communication. Right at this point, hearing the terms ‘philosophy’ and ‘media’, taxi driver asked us: “so, from your view, what is the philosophy of Nancy Ajram?” He was apparently a fan of the Arab singer.
This interruption, though seemingly naïve in the first glance, was deep enough to make me think about it for a while. All the professors we meet in such conferences, with all the tribunes they have, can hardly communicate their message(s) to public audience as effectively as Nancy Ajram does. More surprising is that Nancy speaks a different language, and her success in Iran is mostly due to her well-directed, story-telling video clips.
What is the secret to effectively speaking to public audience? I recall Hanibal Lecter from ‘the Silence of the Lambs‘, saying: “first principle is, Claris, simplicity.” Be simple and easily understandable, and people will follow you and sympathize with you as a real element; be complicated, and you will become the make-believe part of the story.
One may claim that ‘simplicity’ is the exclusive profession of Art. I, however, think that Simplicity is itself an Art; an art that many enlightened figures and thinkers unfortunately lack. People’s day-to-day problems are simple, and they expect simple answers for their problems. But enlightened thinkers, who may know the solution much better than others, use complicated words to communicate an even more complicated thought. Here appears a gap between people’s demand and thinkers’ supply. And in Iran, Ahmadinejad is an example of those who take advantage of this gap. He speaks in a simple manner, and is easily understandable. He offers simple solutions (though his solutions may practically turn into nightmares). And in this sense, Ahmadinejad is an artist. This is why that taxi driver, that fan of Nancy Ajram, had hung a picture of Ahmadinejad in his car.
*****
Conference, under the auspices of Youth National Organization
Ayatollah Haj-Ali Akbari, Head of Youth National Organization + me and my friends
Join the Conversation
Havin a couple of beers with Ayatollah? Why not… (last pic)
highly doubt those are beers…But now im craving some chelo kabob
we call it Ma-o-shair (an arabic word which literally Means: Juice of Grain), which is a malt drink (a local variety of non-alcoholic beer). and producers try to make bottles similar to Beers, you know, due to a Complex… we miss it!
But back to the subject…
I agree with your assessment about beauty & simplicity in communication…So true.
I feel that our over zealous ambitious consumerism, materialism is what makes our lives even more complexe. I agree that we should aim for a more simple way of living and to appreciate every moment, to seek its true beauty. Complexity fogs our perception.
The battle between the intellectual and the visceral is certainly one that is shaping our world. The politician who manages to catch this “one of the common folk” aura goes far. George Bush demonstrated this in his two victories against opponents demonstrably more qualified, and, in the Democratic race, Hillary Clinton has evoked this spectre against Barack Obama, claiming that he is too intellectual and out of touch with the mass of the people.
This kind of charm, however, is exactly like a pretty face. It is in and of itself a kind of mass consumerism, since it does not necessarily reflect the inner workings of the populist, but is an image for consumption. Smiling “men of the people” have done more for merciless, faceless corporatism, classism and imperialism, against the very yearnings that they manipulate, and yet people will still keep a sentimental place for them.
Give me a warty, bad-tempered, mouth breathing statesman and intellectual who subscribes to the best human rights principles and truly has “the common folks” interests at heart anytime.
Mohammad and Eric, I think you’re both pointing to a difference between form and substance.
Substantively, simplicity in communication is a very good thing, because it forces us to get to the point, and to make the point, in such a concise manner, that we’re forced to leave behind all the B.S. If we think clearly, we can arrive at the essence of a matter, and convey it to the masses in the most convincing way possible. They will buy in because the idea makes sense, and is being conveyed simply, without any attempt to confuse.
However, while substantive simplicity it good, you have to be careful not to buy into a false version of simplicy, by which you try to convince people, using simplicity as a merely a tactic, but you convince them of things which make no sense. This is not simplicity in its purest sense, but is instead manipulation.
A first principle is to find the truth, and then to convey it in the most straigtfoward and simple manner. But first make sure it’s the truth. And as the listener, you first determine whether the idea presented makes sense, before you get swept away by the style of the presentation.
How do you find the truth? Think simply. A baby is born. What does she need to live a good and happy life? Food, a roof over her head, some decent healthcare, guildance, and a whole lot of love. When you hear the politician speak; ask yourself if he will make sure that the baby will have what she needs.