Just be clear that it was Dai Vernon who said it.

Thanks, I had heard it credited to him before, but wasn't sure if that was right.

I understand his point, that things should be kept reduced to a minimum in their layers of complexity, and in general, I strongly agree with his assessment that a good routine should be able to be described wihout a lot of wordage.
But with all due respect ot The Professor, I still maintain that there are some great effects and routines that need a couple of sentences to be described.

With regard to all opinions including my own and regardless of source (Vernon, Miller, Burger, etc.) there is always a certain amount, perhaps a great deal, of personal taste attached to those opinions. Some days I'm a bit more frivolous and forgiving than others, and some days I'm serious and single minded. So depending on what day you catch me my opinions may not always be consistant. So to quote a person's opinion and set it as foundation or law of magic is a little TOO strict. Most effects in card magic can be whittled down to a couple of words: Revelations, appearances, Vanishes, Transpositions, etc. It isn't about the description, it's about the overall plot. A flurry of activity in a card routine filled with proceedures becomes confusing, at least to me. Once a card is chossen the path to it's revelation needs to be linear. People forget cards more often than magicians forget names. How many times have you asked someone to state their card and they miss called it? "The King of Spades." You turn over the King of Clubs, "Oh yeah, that was it." I guess you have to make the trick as "duh" proof as you can, because when you perform for "real" people they are going to have "real" people flaws.

You know, on any given day I'll take Vernon's opinion over anybody elses when the topic is card magic.

Yes, I agree with Carlos.
This is why you have to have them show it around because the longer the effect, the greater the chance they can forget.
I'll stick with TWISTED SISTER as a "transposition routine"