|
The question of style vs substance continues to present itself in many
practical situations. To be effective, a good solution must include both.
Stylewithout substance is superficial; substance without style may fall short of engaging the audience.
In either case, the point is likely to be lost.
In July 1996, I attended a one-day workshop convened in
Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia,
to examine the environmental impact of the
Parana-Paraguay waterway on the
Pantanal of Mato Grosso.
The day before the conference, I had dinner in La Paz
with a colleague, who was to present his work at the workshop.
Among other topics,
we discussed the subject
of
Later that day,
we traveled to Santa Cruz de la Sierra,
where the workshop was to take place the following day.
My colleague's presentation was highly technical, and it was
delivered in a soft and monotonous tone.
When my turn came, I summarized
the findings of my
1995 study
on the hydrologic and environmental impact of the Parana-Paraguay waterway
on the Pantanal of Mato Grosso.
The last presentation of the day was by a person who spoke in a
very clear and engaging style.
Pleasantly surprised, and seeing that his presentation was quite different from what I had observed before,
I was curious to find out what his background was.
His answer was: "Communications."
That explained it, but I could not help but wonder whether we had again been caught
in the age-old predicament between style and substance.
| ||
|
|
