Burns 1 Andrew Burns AP Language and Composition Mr. Girard April 5, 2009 The Art of Complaining To complain is human; to get one’s way, divine. The art of complaining is extensively documented in human history, with examples ranging from a simple whine or grunt of discomfit to a well-argued legal cased before the Supreme Court. Regardless, as an art, one can be skilled—a professional disputant—or unskilled—a nagging whiner—and whether one falls into one of these two categories or a gradation thereof depends on how closely they adhere to the complaint formation process, the argument fabrication process, and the dispute presentation process. That is not to say that hard and fast rules exist for formulating proper arguments, simply that a general flow characterizes a good complaint. What is there to complain about? Well, there are many things one can complain about. The temperature in the room is much too warm or cold; the chair one is seated in is too hard, or else provides little back support; one’s beverage is bland or overly sweetened; a piece of legislation one supported was quashed or a law one disputed passed; one’s vehicle is too cramped, too spacious, or too fuel inefficient; taxes are much too high or the rich pay too little; companies are rotten and greedy or government is expansive and wasteful. There are many things to complain about so, before settling on a topic for dispute, examine its merits, and more specifically, examine its remedies. Irritation that have no remedy may be mentioned as a source of dissatisfaction, but to dwell too heavily on them makes one a blubbering whiner, not a skilled disputant. Issues of dispute must have a remedy for a complaint to be merited. The prudence of
Burns 2 high taxation is a valid point of dispute, for legislation provides a remedy; the weather outdoors is a superfluous point of dispute, for acts of God, while sometimes discomfiting, may not be remedied. Once one has confirmed that the issue of dispute is that which has remedy, one enters the complaint formation process. Here one asks: What is it that I dislike about the status quo and why? For example, if my initial point of dispute is that high taxation is bad, it is here that I must specify that it is bad because it discourages investment and stifles growth. Thus I can complete the “complaint”: I think that this high taxation is bad because it discourages investment and stifles growth. What is the ultimate goal of this complaint? The ultimate goal of this type of complaint is to convince others to complain, so that enough individuals complain and the taxation policy is changed. Not all complaints are of this nature. Some complaints are smaller and less far reaching. For example, if the temperature of the classroom is much too low, one may make the “complaint”: I’m freezing; the classroom is much too cold. This complaint has merit because the temperature of the classroom may be changed by adjusting the thermostat, and it gives a “why” for the complaint—I’m freezing. The “I’m freezing” functions as the complete explanation that could be added to the tail of the complaint to render it: I think that the classroom is much too cold because I’m freezing. This complaint is simple, yet valid. It is so simple, in fact, that it would rarely require that one continue on to the next phase of the complaint making process. If one has a complaint, one need effectively argue the complaint for it to be seen as valid to onlookers. To argue, one must have two things: a rebutting response to any initial argument and a valid, coherent solution. For example, if we return to our simplistic complaint about the temperature of the room, the temperature disputant, that is, the “freezing” individual must
Burns 3 anticipate the “others” may not agree that the temperature is too cold. How the “freezing” individual rebuts this complaint depends on the audience to whom the disputant must appeal, and the credibility of the “others.” If the audience to whom the complaint is made is likewise shivering, a rebuttal might not be necessary. It is likely that the mere mention of the uncomfortable temperature provided the audience enough justification to adjust the thermostat; however, if the audience is wearing a tank-top and hot pants while fanning him or herself with a sheet of paper, one might indeed find it necessary to rebut the “others,” perhaps pointing to one’s red, raw extremities or indicating other individuals in the room that are likewise shivering from the inhospitable temperature. As indicated earlier, a solution must be provided for the remedy of the complaint. While the solution to the cold room complaint may be obvious—adjust the thermostat—a solution to the high taxation complaint is much more difficult and requires a much higher level thinking. Nevertheless, it is essential that before any complaint is made, the complainant identify arguments against the complaint, formulate rebuttals, and provide a valid solution to remedy the matter of contention. The last detail that must be addressed is presentation. When addressing a hostile audience, one may only use gentle, reassuring words to convince them of the need to remedy the matter of contention, whereas, when in the company of likeminded individuals, one may use fiery whines to rally them in support of a cause. The identification of which audience constitutes a hostile one and which a “likeminded” one is a component of the art of dispute and requires an examination of the variables that could move an individual for or against a complaint. For example, complaining about high taxation may be viewed favorably by an audience of middle-class families, but may be pelted by boos of scorn by an audience of lower-class welfare moms. First, know thy audience.