• May 20, 2013

Previous

Next

PowerlessPoint

April 27, 2010, 11:22 am

Today I learned that there are moments when I see eye-to-eye with the military. After General Stanley A. McChrystal, the leader of American and NATO forces in Afghanistan, viewed a near-nigh incomprehensible slide of a diagram consisting of seemingly countless swirling and overlapping thin, colored, arced lines—part of a PowerPoint presentation designed to explain American strategy in the region—he said, “When we understand that slide, we’ll have won the war.” Having seen the diagram reproduced in The New York Times today), I realize that to comprehend it requires an advanced degree in Superlogical Nuerophysiological Opticophysical Psychology, as well as at least a decade of hands-on practice in The Art of Idiotic Drawing.

When the PowerPoint program first came out in the late 80s, I laughed at its vapidity. Its charts looked like the stuff of 1950s communist meetings that would celebrate huge beet crops in some collective or other. Nowadays, PowerPoint is far more sophisticated. It’s dominated by colorful bar graphs that look like skyscrapers, yet can rise and fall like pistons. It has sentences that bubble up from the bottom of the screen to settle into their cozy bulleted positions, or quotations that mysteriously emerge out of dark and foggy purple backgrounds and then disappear into backgrounds that have mysteriously turned bright red. These bells and whistles are supposed to help audiences pay attention and grasp the complex information that the lecturer is presenting. The theory is that juxtaposing text with visually comprehensible translations or symbolic representations of data leads to deeper audience understanding and better audience retention.

It’s no mystery why PowerPoint is appealing. It’s easy to use, easy to look at, and a lively, energetic way to mix text and pictures in an age that likes doing these things. And in an age when most people squirm if they must sit still to listen to a person speak for longer than a minute, PowerPoint keeps them calm. Its soothing, assuaging underlying message is that there’s no topic too complex, no problem too difficult, no idea too subtle that ordinary human beings can’t grasp it in a 20-minute presentation. PowerPoint runs roughshod over phenomena by flattening them, so that nothing is more important than anything else.

PowerPoint presentations appeal to us because of their illusions. They are the contemporary version of the Platonic cave, where people are transfixed by shadows of the real. And by fancying up presentations with color, PowerPoint proves it is deeply pernicious. It actually appeals to emotions. Throw in red, white, and blue, and Americans swell with pride; spatter green around the presentation, and even the dourest environmentalists can be made to feel jolly. Use a baby pink bar in a bar graph, and the university’s budgetary woes don’t look so bad.

I’m just finishing up a semester where I am one of 12 professors in a team-taught honors course in which we each give a couple of lectures for the whole group, while also teaching two small discussion sections on the readings. All of us, including me, use PowerPoint when we lecture. Students seem to love it; they certainly expect it, as you can see them waiting to eagerly write down the PowerPoint bullets and highlighted text (I can’t figure out why, since almost all the lectures, in their PowerPoint presentations, are posted later on Blackboard).

Yet when I look out over the audience of well over 200 students and faculty, I often wonder if anyone is truly listening to what are often beautifully argued lectures. Who is paying rapt attention? Who is experiencing the arguments and reasons that are behind the conclusions that end up in those bulleted points and ephemeral quotations?

I am scheduled to give the final lecture in this course—on Andy Warhol. It will offer an interpretation of the meaning of the artist’s work, situate it in our culture, and present a fair amount of facts. Yes, I’ll use PowerPoint. But if you’re wondering why, I’ll use it strictly as a way to embed images of Warhol’s art in a sequence, shown against a solid black background. But there will be no bulleted points, no blown up text, no fancy fades. This will consist of my aural narrative illustrated by still images of 20 works of art. It is aimed only at those who are willing to listen.

This entry was posted in Books. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to PowerlessPoint

arrive2__net - April 28, 2010 at 4:23 am

On the face of it… you have to say goofy ideas have always been with us, and they are not the exclusive products of PowerPoint. The NY Times article cited in the story is fascinating, it says some US military generals have banned PowerPoint presentations at times, although PowerPoint presentations are considered a key part of our military culture. Maybe PowerPoint is the medium, and the medium is the message, but perhaps PowerPoint can also reveal psycho-babble to those who realize it could be there, lurking in the bulleted lists and leering from behind elaborate illustrations. Perhaps this teaches us that there is more to good ideas than how they look, or how they are presented. Good article. Bernard SchusterArrive2.net

11159786 - April 28, 2010 at 6:28 am

The PowerPoint mode is actually quite wonderful for teaching if the students have been provided with the “slides” in advance of the class, as we do in all introductory physics classes at Penn State. Then, in class, they need only write comments and supplementary info on their printouts, meaning that they can pay “rapt attention” and think during the class, instead of having to divide attention between scribbling notes and thinking. It is important that some new material be added, in class, or else most won’t come at all.Milton Cole,, Penn State

mbelvadi - April 28, 2010 at 7:03 am

I highly recommend Edward Tufte’s short book, The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint: http://www.worldcat.org/title/cognitive-style-of-powerpoint/oclc/52289224/editions?referer=di&editionsView=trueFor those trying to wean themselves and their students off the “pernicious” format, it provides great fodder.Watch a Steven Jobs presentation sometime (many are online), and note how he uses presentation software (Keynote of course, not PowerPoint) so effectively. Those of you teaching presentation skills might want to include one of his videos as a class assignment – the man is one of the very best public speakers alive today.

millersr - April 28, 2010 at 8:12 am

the map is not the territory…a korzybski

dank48 - April 28, 2010 at 8:41 am

I highly recommend all of Edward Tufte’s books. But PowerPoint is like any other tool: it can be used properly and effectively to help convey information, or it can be used to confuse, obfuscate, and deceive, not to mention bewilder.A stick of charcoal can be used to create a beautiful drawing or to scrawl obscenities. My bete noir–not unique to PowerPoint but generally typical of the chart junk that people are tempted to use–is the three-dimensional, tilted pie graph. No legitimate purpose is served by a third dimension, and slanting the graph slants the presentation.On the other hand, I know a deaf student who uses PowerPoint very effectively for class presentations that would otherwise require an interpreter.

wisensale - April 28, 2010 at 9:18 am

I too say check out Edward Tufte’s critique of PowerPoint and his work on “chart junk.” And of course there is a parody or two of it on YouTube, including Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address in PowerPoint.

ugahistory - April 28, 2010 at 12:27 pm

I’ve never understood the anti-PowerPoint movement that floats about campuses. One can, of course, use PowerPoint insipidly or vapidly, but done well, it’s a great tool to enhance a lecture. All it really is is a high tech replacement for the chalkboard (albeit with far better chalk-manship than I have) and slides that we’ve been using in the classroom at least as far back as living memory . . .

mbelvadi - April 28, 2010 at 10:10 pm

ugahistory, read the Tufte book I cited to understand the anti-powerpoint movement. It’s a short book, and very entertaining, and if your library doesn’t already own it, request it via Interlibrary loan.I won’t try to summarize Tufte, but to add my own opinion, it’s not just a high tech replacement for overhead and chalk – the cute whiz-bang features provide a crutch to avoid learning any kind of decent presentation/rhetoric skills, the kind of skills that were required to keep an audience’s attention when all you had was chalk and couldn’t have animated bullets twirl in and out of the screen. Yes, used well it definitely enhances a presentation (see again my reference to Steve Jobs’s use of presentation software), but the vast majority of people don’t bother to learn to use it well, and used poorly it can be worse than no visuals at all. Haven’t you ever sat through a presentation where the speaker essentially read off entire paragraphs from the powerpoint screen, with barely an ad lib, or at most orally converted the bulleted fragments into full sentences but without much further analysis?

mbisesi - May 3, 2010 at 11:36 am

In an attempt to avoid “Death by PowerPoint” presentations, I limit students to five (yes, 5!) slides, and I recommend the “PresentationZen” design principles of Garr Reynolds (www.presentationzen.com).

rochsenbein - May 3, 2010 at 11:43 am

Years ago, I was asked to participate in an unclassified project for a federal agency in Washington. In brief, the task was to produce a clear 20-page narrative positioning document outlining long-term vision, to be distilled out of dozens of presentations containing hundreds of Powerpoint slides. The slides were saturated with jargon, acronyms, and charts that were works of art. The document was going to be distributed to Congressional staffers and made available to the public through the agency’s website, so it had to be clear and had to build to a series of irrefutable conclusions. The agency had made two internal attempts at this but, as they said, couldn’t overcome their own culture of complexity.It was a case study in what Tufte talks about in his essay The Cognitive Style of Powerpoint. The exercise of transforming the slides into narrative language quickly brought to the surface any weak points, failures in the logic chain, troubling counter-arguments. It is amazing how sometimes image can overcome reason. Combine that with the obfuscatory nature of the professional language in some corners of government and you end up with a truly interesting task. In the end we did a credible job in my view, and several of the strategic objectives were modified as a result of our work. The power of language.

ulyssesmsu - May 22, 2010 at 12:10 pm

PowerPoint is a great tool, but the incompetence of a user can nullify the effectiveness of even the most sophisticated tool. When a presentation is crappy, who should we blame–the tool, or the presenter who used the tool to create the presentation? Blaming the tool is like seeing an ugly house and blaming the hammer.The problem is with HOW information is presented. In this, with respect, even Tufte misses the point. The problem is not the “cognitive style” or the “pernicious format” of PowerPoint. Before PPT, presenters made the exact same mistakes with overhead-projector transparency slides. Before that, did you ever see an article about “the cognitive style” of chalkboards–?Making PowerPoint the villain is incorrect and an abject failure of analysis.

  • 1255 Twenty-Third St, N.W.
  • Washington, D.C. 20037
subscribe today

Get the insight you need for success in academe.