As a cartoonist, I draw a series of lines and segments of lines until there is a complete picture. As I draw, I might modify some lines and segments of lines until there is a complete image, however, it is only after I can see the complete picture that I can critique it. That is when I accept or reject the work, redo it if possible, modify what needs to be modified, or put it on the pile of things that seemed promising but did not in the end come out as planned.

I would never finish a picture if I critiqued each line as I drew it.

This approach was useful in Union work, as, while presenting a complete summary of an argument or a defense of the member, the other side would grasp at words and sentences to argue and find fault with which often meant they were not grasping the fine points as they were worried about vocabulary choices and parsing sentences in order to avoid having to offer factual counterpoints, or, worse, actually were unable to grasp the concept and were arguing their own little case in their heads while others in the room were dealing with the facts as laid out on the table.

This usually meant that at the level of the arbitration when both sides submit their summary statement, the other side was blindsided by the presentation of all facts unfiltered by interruption so they were hearing the complete defense for the first time.

My summation may have been long and involved, but they were inclusive with no facts or points omitted and too often heard for the first time at that point..

Although they might have been prepared to present all grammatical errors and sentence parsing, it was at the summation that it became clear either their approach kept them from grasping all the facts or they had had no intention to view the facts and decided accordingly to just confuse things.

I was trained in approaching member Grievances by a man named Joe Zarba who had little ways on controlling an arbitration with little subtle actions and was very adept at phrasing sentences in such a way that the other side would go off on the vocabulary and sentence parsing while the arbitrator had to choose between their performance and the presentation of facts.

I may draw a cartoon line by line and line segment by line segment, but I cannot assess the picture until it is completed and then I can look for the flaws to correct. 

If. however, I critigue every line or line segment as I draw them, the picture will never be complete.

In Grievance hearings no matter how far off the track they might go, I earned to make my shopping lists during these intervals returning to the main point as if they had said nothing when it was my turn.

When Joe Zarba held a document the other side considered important up to his artificial eye pretending to inspect it, the Grievant could relax as that was a sign the document, like most of the petty arguments and comebacks, was irrelevant and the case won. It was subtle, the other side did not know it, but it really was a good moment for the Grievant.

So, between my understanding of the importance of seeing the whole picture because it is part of drawing and my Union training, I will let you know when I would prefer discussing the issue not vocabulary.

One time when presenting some complicated information to a room full of White people, when they were not accepting the facts as presented but were arguing minutia, I said,”what you people need to understand is that if you back the wrong measure we lose the raise,” and the rest of the meeting was a criticism of my calling them “you people” with most of the lecture I received was about the racist overtone to my approach as I saw them as “you people”.

We had to have a second meeting to go over what the first meeting was supposed to cover.

So, in a discussion, regardless if it is important to argue the nuance of a word, I may cut you off to get back to the topic or simply accept you cannot grasp it.

Some treatment of a serious topic will take time and can be involved, but unless you wait for the complete telling, we are only dealing with lines and sentences and not pictures or paragraphs.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.