The trend of language simplification in the US President’s State of the Union (SOTU) is often interpreted as a sign of a decline in education, but from a user experience (UX) perspective, this may be an improvement in information being easier to understand by the public.
Simplifying complex concepts and are highly respected in UX and design fields, in stark contrast to the view that some presses equate complex languages with depth of knowledge. Forrest Gump's character perfectly interprets the difference between "stupid" and "simple": he may lack the intelligence in the traditional sense, but has unique wisdom and a pure mind, and can see the essence behind complex things.
A few years ago, The Guardian released a fascinating infographic—" Our State of the Union address... is getting stupider".
This interactive chart (recommended to view the original text, only screenshots here) depicts the evolution of the State of the Union address of the US President from 1790 to 2014. Even if you are not interested in politics, the State of the Union address is a valuable source of linguistic data as it covers more than two hundred years of text samples, with broadly similar subjects and content.
The chart shows two aspects of information:
Fleish-Kincaid test evaluates the difficulty of comprehension of text paragraphs - the lower the value, the easier the text is to understand.
The chart shows that since around 1810, the difficulty of understanding the State of the Union address has continued to decline, and the length of the article has been generally shortened. In fact, an eighth-grade student can understand President Obama's recent speech.
How bad is modern life?
It is puzzling that The Guardian and many other media view this trend as evidence of a decline in education and a decline in civilization. "The language standards for presidential speeches have dropped", the subtitle declared.
"Obama is just the latest representative of the long-standing 'popular' speeches." "Daily Call" commented.
This may be just my personal opinion, but it seems a bit ridiculous.
While I won't praise modern politics, isn't this exactly evidence of the improvement of user experience (UX)?
As designers and UX practitioners, we always seek the easiest way to accomplish any goal. If the user test shows that a certain percentage of users cannot understand our interface, we will redesign it.
Anyone who can simplify complex problems is considered a star. We praise simplicity. If the State of the Union is an application that conveys ideas to citizens, we will do everything we can to make sure it reaches as many audiences as possible.
However, in the press, there seems to be an underlying idea that good ideas require gorgeous rhetoric and lengthy sentences.
This is a really strange position.
The following is the second paragraph of President James Madison's speech in 1815:
In the provisions, the rights and honors of the United States of America were specially safeguarded, and Dei permanently waived all rights to claim tribute from them. These impressions, strengthened by subsequent deals with Tunisia and the Regent of Tripoli, were a result of the emergence of larger forces led by Brigadier General Bainbridge (Commander of the Expeditionary Force), and his wise precautions for staying in the region, Provides reasonable future security for us through valuable trade within the scope of Barbary Pirates patrol.
Wow! These are two sentences, 109 words, Fleish-Kinkaid's level is 26.34.
Now, I don't want to turn this into "National Criticism of James Madison Day" because it is unfair to interpret his texts without context and context. However, I suspect that most of us need to think hard to understand what he means. I've read it four times and I think I get it-but I pray that there won't be an exam afterward.
This is undoubtedly an impressive language skill, but is this the writing style we should pursue for future speeches?
Steve Jobs talked about this issue many times over the years.
"Simplicity is harder than complex: you have to work hard to make your thinking clear in order to be simple. But in the end it is worth it because once you do it, you can move mountains."
Let's distinguish between simplicity and stupidity.
Forrest Gump FAQ
The bench in Forrest Gump is an important symbol in the movie. Forrest tells his life story to the stranger sitting next to him on the bench. The bench represents Forrest’s comfort and reflection, and it is also where he shares his wisdom and life experience. It also symbolizes the commonality of human experience, as different people from all walks of life sit next to Forrest and listen to his stories.
The bench used in the movie Forrest Gump is located at the Savannah Museum of History in Savannah, Georgia. It was initially placed in Chippeva Square during shooting, but was moved to the museum to protect and avoid damage.
In Forrest Gump, Forrest's character is portrayed as simple, not stupid. He may lack traditional intelligence, but he has unique wisdom and a pure mind. He sees the world in a direct and honest way, which often gives him profound insights. His simplicity allows him to see through the complexities of life and understand the basic truths that others often miss.
(The answers to subsequent questions are omitted, maintaining the style and content consistent with the original text)
The above is the detailed content of Forrest Gump and the Difference Between Dumb and Simple. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!