"It is not a show," the editor wrote, "but a three ply concern; and obliging original obviously observed offering overwhelming outviewing over-throwing opposition ostentatious olla podria of oriental or occidental oppulent omnium gatherum. Several singular separate solid superior surprising superlatively sensational successful stupendous shows, masterly magnificent multifarious manifold, massive marvelous might miraculous monster museums, mastadon menagerie unrivaled unapproachable, unequaled unparalled unquestionably useful - unequivocally unique union unconditionally unobjectionable unomitted unbounded combined concrete colossal cyclopean culminated carefully conceived circus concentration, cabinic, coalescence, chief concerted conglomeration competently calculated, capital captivating calisthenic classical coagmented caravan costly coveted crowning circensian, coactive climax chronicaled choicedrawn chaste catholic challenge competing composite collective colligated cohesive coefficient commanding ceremonious centralized composition,"

Loosely translated, “It was good.”

This convoluted passage leading nowhere reminds me of a few sermons I have heard, speeches by politicians, and op ed pieces appearing in prestigious newspapers in which the perpetrator rambled on for an excessively long time (ten minutes would have seemed an eternity). It is a syndrome that people who write or speak need to keep in mind as they prepare their message.

Too many folks who are audacious enough to think anyone cares what they think need to reassess who will be listening to or reading their tidbits of wisdom and write or speak to them and not to hear themselves talk or read their essay. It is not easy to write or speak concisely. The misconception is that the more words I use the better it must be.

Oratory was a highly respected art before the advent of the radio and television. At Gettysburg, a renowned public orator, Edward Everett, was the principal speaker. He spoke for just over two hours and it was said that the crowd listened with rapt attention. I suspect a few old timers had to go to the porta-potty and one paper noted that there were a few who wandered around the battlefield during his address. Then Lincoln stood and in his high-pitched voice spoke for less than two minutes.

It is possible to find Everett’s words if one is really interested in what he said. The newspapers of the day acclaimed it highly and some belittled Lincoln’s “poor choice of words.” One newspaper called Lincoln’s speech a “national disgrace.” Few today could quote a line or a single word from Mr. Everett but many Americans can repeat word for word Lincoln’s Gettysburg address.

What was the difference? Why was one, admittedly good, speech forgotten and the other remembered with reverence after one hundred forty-two years. The answer is not the difference in length. Both praised the men who had fought on these bloody plains. But one spoke to the crowd and the other to the ages. One speech was breathed and died at Gettysburg. The other touched hearts universally.

There lies the secret of good communications. You don’t have to be a great public speaker or a writer of great literature to apply this principle. I tell the students at the Christian Women’s Job Corps you cannot not communicate. Every encounter with another individual is a communication and we need to decide what message we want the other person to have. So, what have you got to say for yourself?=