1. Communication Problems
Pigs
During the episode “Pigs” of the German ARD series “Polizeiruf 110,” a lawyer is interrogated. Without being prompted, the lawyer explains the reasons for the unpopularity of members of his profession, seemingly anticipating expected criticism. He mentions that the specialized language was originally developed to disenfranchise laypeople, a belief held by many, and many feel that lawyers prevent them from understanding their own rights. (rbb, 24.03.2024, Polizeiruf 110, „Schweine“, 30:43-31:05)
Duration of Study
This immediately reminds me of a conversation between my uncle and his niece, who studies law. He simply wanted to know how much longer she needed to study at the university. His question was straightforward: “How long do you need until you are finished?” The exact wording is not important; we understand that the question targets a point in time, and my uncle expected an estimate, not an exact date. Unfortunately, the prospective lawyer provided all sorts of responses, but did not give him a clear answer. She could have responded with a single word, like “2030!”, implying “By the year 2030” or could have elaborated upon request with “approximately”. She could have specified the year more precisely, perhaps in the form of “Pessimistically, by 2032.” After several back-and-forths, queries, and pleas for a concise answer, she seemed to have taken something away from him. My uncle felt dispossessed of his ability to communicate, at least he seemed to contemplate whether he lacked intellect.
In the Mirror of the Other
Sometimes we only recognize ourselves or something about ourselves in the mirror of the other, and I was startled by the thought that I might not express myself sufficiently, not listen well enough, and thus might generally lack good communication skills. I also remembered my father accusing me several times of not being able to speak properly, and I remembered my resolve to work on it if necessary. Secondly, I remembered the legendary lecture by the professor of computer science, Patrick Winston, and his realization that our success in life is significantly determined by our ability to speak, to write, and lastly, by the quality of our ideas. Winston’s lectures reinforced my resolutions.
Inspiration
For inspiration or role models, we do not turn to the usual giants in language mastery like Luther, Nietzsche, Goethe, Hebel, Kafka, Mann, etc., nor do we take the pedagogically unmatched style guide by Reiners or his “Art of Speech,” no, we keep it as simple as possible and consider here the two most important principles of speaking: understanding and authenticity. Knowledge of principles, i.e., knowledge about aspects of communication, is more important than practicing them. At least for Prof. Winston, knowledge about good communication takes precedence over practice, and I agree with him. (MIT OpenCourseWare; Prof. Patrick Winston; How to Speak; https://youtu.be/Unzc731iCUY?si=U5jwmby6zQKPtX6E)
2. Egon Manke
Assortment
A good and simple technique for clear speaking is pyramidal speaking, which I was able to observe particularly well during the “Nordreportage” “Meat Salad and Grill Meatball” about the shop owner Egon Manke. Whether to a customer, his son, a friend, or the reporter, he always first succinctly states the most important thing and then, at a faster pace and somewhat quieter, the details. His good style was immediately noticeable to me, and I hope that is not just subjective! The questions to Manke are assumed by me since they are not heard in the video. I also created the answers due to the lack of transcription:
Question: “What is available for purchase here?”
Manke: “Well, you can actually say, from the hooks to the neck to the head, everything in between, you can get here, and food and drink, of course.”
Less well would be: My wife sometimes spreads minced meat sandwiches. We now also have fresh vegetables twice a week. Our assortment is growing. Over there you will also find sewing stuff, etc.
Store History
Question: “Tell us a little about the store. How long has it been here, how long have you been working here?”
Manke: “The store opened on January 1st. Officially opened. I was born on January 21st. So it’s three weeks older than me. That’s something, right? Yeah, no, you get to know your way around here.”
Less well would be: My father wanted to supply the villagers and my mother was etc.
Area
Question: “Tell us about the area, other stores, the economy, etc.”
Manke: “So how everything has changed here in our countryside. We had here in Wintermoor, they all lived from agriculture, almost all, few probably, who did something else, they had livestock, all mixed up, but that’s all gone, and in Schneverdingen, which is the larger place here nearby, there were 16 shoe factories, of the 16 none are left, they are all gone. Then we had five such innkeepers where you could drink beer and had a bit of entertainment, also gone.”
Analysis: Manke immediately says that nothing is like it was. Everything has changed. Which businesses are gone, etc., is secondary.
Son
Question: “How is your son doing?”
Manke: “He’s doing well. Diligent, reliable, neat, keeps the store nice and tidy. No, you can’t say otherwise. He got all the good stuff.”
Analysis: Again, first the most important thing in a short sentence, that the son is good, and then in the subordinate clause the details.
Jokes
Manke to a customer: “Of everyone here, he has the most money, here in our area. He built a power plant and is still involved with 50% in another power plant. He earns 3900 marks a day there, you can believe it or not, and half as much at the other one. So he has 5000 marks a day, excuse me,…”
Then further Manke: “Yes, we always have a lot to talk about, about all that lies behind us, and what we still have ahead of us. Only the way is not so long anymore. 85, I first said, we want to become, and then we want to see further. Only he will get older, because his parents also became so old. He will outlive us.”
(NDR; Meat Salad and Grill Meatball – Manke’s General Store in Wintermoor (first broadcast 18.2.2013, 28:30 min length; https://archiv-wintermoor.de/general/die-nordstory-wintermoor-in-ndr)
3. Mike Tyson
Prison
As a role model in terms of uniqueness, authenticity, and truthfulness, former heavyweight boxer Mike Tyson immediately comes to mind. Sitting opposite an interview or conversation partner, with a fearless look, he takes the time to think or just to gather his thoughts, because there are no blockages, stress, worries about image loss, showing off, etc., he just wants to put it in a certain, understandable form, but not change the content: When asked about his time in prison, he says: “I was there. I don’t say I was in prison, I’m hardcore. No, because of a few homosexuals, a bunch of … A bunch of weak people in prison, and the reason for prison, why people are locked up, because they can’t get their shit together, they can’t organize their lives. That doesn’t mean you’re a bad person just because you’re in prison, but it means you’re a dysfunctional, weak individual who can’t get their life together out there in the world. That doesn’t mean you’re a tough guy. It’s easy for someone to beat someone else up, with your 10-12 guys behind you or something. No, I’m talking, man to man, bravo against bravo, I’ll take on anyone, red blood, blue blood, whoever.” (YouTube; Fighting Centre; Mike Tyson talks about people in prison; https://youtu.be/Me-sRC48dDk?si=fgW2e6FCFo5k9iUu)
So he emphasizes that the prison is full of people who can’t manage their lives. This, according to Tyson, doesn’t make them bad people, but dysfunctional and weak individuals. Furthermore, he distances himself from the idea that physical superiority in a group proves strength. Instead, he defines true strength as the ability to measure oneself in direct, fair single combat, regardless of the social or biological origin of the opponents. If Tyson wanted to impress and be concerned about his image, he might have answered something like this: “During my time in prison, I underwent a major, significant transformation. I faced very tough challenges. During that time, I learned that you don’t get stronger by inflicting pain on others, but by staying true to your principles.” We easily recognize the inauthentic behavior here.
Ring Opponents
In an interview with Tucker Carlson, Tyson is asked about his feelings toward his ring opponents and answers: “I wanted to kill them […]” Carlson laughs nervously and then asks how Tyson prepares for this emotional state: “I think about who I am. I don’t want to go back to where I come from. I don’t want to go back to poverty […]” And further with: “I thought, the more I hurt the opponent, the more popular it makes me […]” (Fox News; Tucker Carlson today; Mike Tyson on wanting to ‘kill’ his opponents in the ring, living with tigers; https://youtu.be/d_UsNdPXhWE?si=tQUSb3klZHpBTNNu)
Again, typically for Tyson, he expresses his feelings and his past in a very direct way. If he had not honestly said that he had no strong emotions against his opponents or, that he just wanted to win, then it would show a detached and indifferent attitude, and it would contradict his passion and emotional depth. We as viewers would have gained nothing.
Idols
When asked about his idols as a child or teenager, someone from the audience calls out “Mohamed Ali,” to which Tyson replies: “No, I didn’t want to be like Muhammad Ali, because where I came from, Ali didn’t come from where I came from. I came from dirt, scum, and sewage, so I wanted to be mean like Sonny Liston and Jack Dempsey. I wanted to be wild, I wanted to kill you with my fear. I wasn’t like Muhammad Ali. I love and respect Muhammad Ali, but Muhammad Ali isn’t like me, he doesn’t come from the world I come from.” (Liam Galvin; Mike Tyson – ‘I Didn’t Want to be Like Muhammad Ali!’ https://youtu.be/s-H-OnJuNXU?si=UkG8b_OzQk59X4SG)
Tyson thus makes it clear that he distinguishes himself from Ali because their origins and therefore their worldviews are very different. Ali was known for his elegant style and his societal influence. In contrast, Tyson comes from a world of dirt, scum, etc., and that made him rough and aggressive. Therefore, he identifies more with fighters like Sonny Liston and Jack Dempsey, who are known for their toughness and wildness. A non-authentic answer, aimed at impressing the audience and taking a politically correct stance, might have sounded like this: “Muhammad Ali was undoubtedly one of the greatest boxers of all time, and of course, I always looked up to him. His elegance in the ring and his commitment outside of it were inspiring. I tried to follow in his footsteps, both as an athlete and as an activist. He paved the way for fighters like me, and I am proud to be part of this legacy.”
4. Conclusion
The considerations of Manke and Tyson are intended to illustrate the two principles or demands for understandability and truthfulness. At best, they also provide impulses for critically examining and optimizing our own way of communication.
Leave a Reply