Let’s develop better use of the language within our field.  Our weakness here feeds our weakness in presenting a more effective argument for the arts (Work Task #1).  Our needs in this area are numerous. 

One, we tend to misunderstand, and confuse the “languages”  of marketing, development and simple descriptive narrative.  “Market talk” has infused both of the other areas.  Foundation proposals read like marketing promotions and simple narrative often wanders incomprehensively between “market talk,” foundation narrative and simple prose.  Those who read these reports don’t know which end is up.  As a field, let’s come to understand that there is a difference among these 3 areas, that we need to learn what they are, and practice them.

Two, — and this is related to the paragraph above, we frequently make assertions that are of our own opinion, that cannot be substantiated.  We allow (perhaps without knowing it) our world view to dominate our language, both written and spoken.  We often sound preachy.  Much of what we say and write can be substantiated through the many research organizations associated with our field (Foundation Center; Urban Institute; the many divisions of the U.S. government, like the Census Bureau, etc.).  The use of assertions that are substantiated will deeply and positively affect our work. 

Three, when we are acting as advocates, we speak to audiences from all backgrounds.  Within a week, an arts leader will speak to politicians, (wealthy) board members, community leaders, and artists within h/her own organization, colleagues within and outside h/her field.  Each of these “audiences” will respond to messages better if the messages are delivered in the language of the receiver.  Here I don’t suggest a complete translation, but an understanding and sensitivity to the language of the receiver.  Developing this ability requires that we listen very carefully to those within each of the areas mentioned above, then dissect the nuances of verbal exchange, and finally practice inclusion of elements of the styles.

Around 35 years ago I took a course in teacher evaluation that I was required to take for certification to become a school administration.  One of the first exercises we were given was to list adjectives we knew to express “excellent.”  We would be writing teacher evaluations, and our professor wanted us to be able to use a variety of nuances in expressing excellent teaching.  Our results to this exercise were shocking, as our limited vocabulary was painfully exposed to us.  I believe that this limited vocabulary, and the ability to use it in multiple venues is a major challenge for our field.