I really wonder how many of you would have guessed the topic of this blog from the title. My guess would be no one, but if you are reading this, then I have piqued your curiosity. This blog is on good conversations or rather their absence, and the rationale for the above title will be evident as we go along.
A good conversation is like fine wine, one can reflect on its particular qualities well into the future. However just as there are pestilences that ruin a crop of grapes and make for a bad vintage, there are people whose very presence is inimical to a good chat. In every walk of life one comes across some individuals who push the nadirs previously tested, like athletes breaking new records.
For one there are the Boars (Bores). These are people whose knowledge and their desire to impart it, is far in excess of their ability to communicate. They trap their innocent audience in the banality of unnecessary details, from which extrication is difficult. Some of them can be almost hypnotic, holding their hapless audience in an unwitting thrall. We must all, at some time or another, have experienced being caught in the midst of an enthusiastic but boring presentation, and the associated feeling of time crawling as your thoughts addle over and freeze. As the other person steps up a verbal gear and their animation and passion increases, your eyelids start to droop and your brain is simulating the desperation of a drowning man trying to stay afloat. Sounds like a lecture from a nerdy professor does it not? But this can also be the effect of a sophomoric conversation, where one person extols rhapsodic, to the utter disregard of the other’s interest levels. Generally, such people are most enthusiastic about their own interests and achievements, and can get unpleasantly surprised if people show any curiosity beyond those vast borders. At such times they will become quiet and not participate. Their redeeming feature is that they seldom realize their own impact, and if asked would count themselves as some of the most interesting people they know. I guess a real bore ranks in equal popularity with people suffering from bad breath and foul body-odor. And as with those maladies, one only hopes that the symptoms will be self-rectified or pointed out by someone else rather than broached by us.
On the other extreme are the Butterflies. These are exponents of the verbal arts whose conversations flit from topic to topic, like a butterfly over a field of flowers. The conversation never touches down for enough time to develop momentum and in his case, an opinion on last night’s gastronomic outing or a bystander’s fashion faux pas, mixed up with bawdy personal comments, is the height of banter. The talk becomes a carousel of sentences that can literally make you dizzy with the pace of change. It’s almost as if the person is trying to distract you from their vapidity like a cheap magician, by switching topics rapidly. And as the topics whir by with increasing intensity, the general level of conversation sinks below the equator. Their presence in a gathering is evidenced by meaningless chitchat, senseless laughter, and a complete absence of a rational and structured conversation. There is no possibility of a good conversation getting any traction with butterflies around, as they are mutually exclusive. Sometimes, after a long and hard day, butterflies can serve as stress relievers. Nothing as strenuous as a thought needs to strike you when one is around, and even if you are in a mental coma no one around will be the wiser. The conversational vehicle is on cruise control, with the wheel firmly in their hands.
Then there are the Shrinking Violets, the ones who are so sensitive that almost anything can potentially force them to withdraw into a protective cocoon. They are normally emotionally challenged, and are always one breath away from an implosion. Most people have one or two topics that they are a bit thin-skinned about, but this variety can be traumatized on almost any issue. Their presence turns the conversational landscape into a virtual minefield, and every word has to be carefully measured and weighed before utterance. This inhibits free speech and stems the flow of ideas. People around them tend to skirt around issues so as not to hurt them, but quite often the more they are shielded the more photo sensitive they get. Their reaction when offended (which can be quite often) varies from a hyper-emotional tirade, to stony silence accompanied by a constipated expression, leaving no doubt in the speakers mind as to what they think.
A good conversation is like fine wine, one can reflect on its particular qualities well into the future. However just as there are pestilences that ruin a crop of grapes and make for a bad vintage, there are people whose very presence is inimical to a good chat. In every walk of life one comes across some individuals who push the nadirs previously tested, like athletes breaking new records.
For one there are the Boars (Bores). These are people whose knowledge and their desire to impart it, is far in excess of their ability to communicate. They trap their innocent audience in the banality of unnecessary details, from which extrication is difficult. Some of them can be almost hypnotic, holding their hapless audience in an unwitting thrall. We must all, at some time or another, have experienced being caught in the midst of an enthusiastic but boring presentation, and the associated feeling of time crawling as your thoughts addle over and freeze. As the other person steps up a verbal gear and their animation and passion increases, your eyelids start to droop and your brain is simulating the desperation of a drowning man trying to stay afloat. Sounds like a lecture from a nerdy professor does it not? But this can also be the effect of a sophomoric conversation, where one person extols rhapsodic, to the utter disregard of the other’s interest levels. Generally, such people are most enthusiastic about their own interests and achievements, and can get unpleasantly surprised if people show any curiosity beyond those vast borders. At such times they will become quiet and not participate. Their redeeming feature is that they seldom realize their own impact, and if asked would count themselves as some of the most interesting people they know. I guess a real bore ranks in equal popularity with people suffering from bad breath and foul body-odor. And as with those maladies, one only hopes that the symptoms will be self-rectified or pointed out by someone else rather than broached by us.
On the other extreme are the Butterflies. These are exponents of the verbal arts whose conversations flit from topic to topic, like a butterfly over a field of flowers. The conversation never touches down for enough time to develop momentum and in his case, an opinion on last night’s gastronomic outing or a bystander’s fashion faux pas, mixed up with bawdy personal comments, is the height of banter. The talk becomes a carousel of sentences that can literally make you dizzy with the pace of change. It’s almost as if the person is trying to distract you from their vapidity like a cheap magician, by switching topics rapidly. And as the topics whir by with increasing intensity, the general level of conversation sinks below the equator. Their presence in a gathering is evidenced by meaningless chitchat, senseless laughter, and a complete absence of a rational and structured conversation. There is no possibility of a good conversation getting any traction with butterflies around, as they are mutually exclusive. Sometimes, after a long and hard day, butterflies can serve as stress relievers. Nothing as strenuous as a thought needs to strike you when one is around, and even if you are in a mental coma no one around will be the wiser. The conversational vehicle is on cruise control, with the wheel firmly in their hands.
Then there are the Shrinking Violets, the ones who are so sensitive that almost anything can potentially force them to withdraw into a protective cocoon. They are normally emotionally challenged, and are always one breath away from an implosion. Most people have one or two topics that they are a bit thin-skinned about, but this variety can be traumatized on almost any issue. Their presence turns the conversational landscape into a virtual minefield, and every word has to be carefully measured and weighed before utterance. This inhibits free speech and stems the flow of ideas. People around them tend to skirt around issues so as not to hurt them, but quite often the more they are shielded the more photo sensitive they get. Their reaction when offended (which can be quite often) varies from a hyper-emotional tirade, to stony silence accompanied by a constipated expression, leaving no doubt in the speakers mind as to what they think.
However the worst of the lot are the Bulls or conversation busters! They are like demolition balls waiting for a conversation to develop some structure, before they swing in to wreck it. They are the worst because they actually allow you to hope that a decent conversation has a chance of budding, before they pull the soil from under its roots. Just as the topic is gathering steam, the group is pulling itself together to discuss an issue of substance, or a few people have put their stake on opposite sides of the ideological fence, these people swing in like battering rams. They are the guardians of the mundane and the ignorant, and they will defend their turf fiercely to ensure that no structure above a hovel can ever be erected on that ground. Any conversation that aspires to reach above sea level will be flattened, by diverting everyone’s attention to some other matter of insignificance. Having completely eviscerated that particular conversation, they can then unflinchingly inflict the unkindest cut of all, by feigning interest and asking the person they interrupted mid-sentence, to continue from where they left off.
Some of these traits can coexist, creating a potent Molotov cocktail. Imagine a bullish butterfly! I have not mentioned another type who can also have an adverse impact, the Clownfish. They are the ones who can rapidly puncture the mood of a conversation with their flippant one-liners, but in general are not as lethal as the others mentioned before.
So then what makes for a good conversation? Is it the person, or is it the sound of their voice? Is it the delivery or is it the topic? Some of the most intelligent people can bore you to death as soon as they open their mouth, and conversely, buffoons can keep you entertained for hours. This is an important question as I consider an ability to hold a good conversation and to keep people engrossed as probably one of the greatest gifts. Also, for a person who experiences bouts of ADD at such times, I find myself rapidly phasing out of the inanities. All of us have inbuilt safety mechanisms, which ensure that we filter out puerile data extremely quickly, before it inundates us. I am by nature a serious person who prefers a deeper conversation, which prods and explores the topic at hand from all sides before a switch to another. If the topic is not adequately examined I feel a lack of fulfillment, almost a sense of denial, and I very quickly drift away mentally. I love a good argument and I definitely love to listen to someone who knows what he / she are talking about. It is always fascinating to listen to someone who has an in-depth understanding of an issue, or is passionate about her ideals. Agreement with the views expressed is not always essential; it is just an additional perquisite.
Einstein gave us the concept of relative time, and to me it is most evident during a conversation. A nice chat can make the hours fly, and vice versa some conversations can make it flow like treacle. I cannot say that I have been surprised though as to the differences in what makes for a good chat amongst people. Food, gossip, children seem to be the all time favorites with women, and I am sure that women would say that men can't talk of anything beyond sports, movies and sex. A lot of people prefer to avoid topics that polarize opinions; often times they find it too strenuous, sometimes do not have the depth of knowledge or understanding to express or defend their views, or are intrinsically uncomfortable with confrontations and disagreements. I am of the view (as expressed in the movie Matrix Reloaded) that you never really know someone until you have fought them (I refer to verbal jousting of course). A good debate clears the air, increases your store of knowledge and most importantly makes you get to know the other person infinitely better. A lively discussion will be remembered for years to come, unlike the generally insipid banter that is forgotten even before the lights are turned off for the day. I still remember in vivid details the debates that we used to have as kids in school, and carried on into college and early adulthood. Some of my best times were spent crossing idealogical swords with my sister in early days, and then my sister-in-law later on.
Another major factor that impacts a conversation is the size of the group. In general, the bigger the group the swifter is the descent to the lowest common denominator. Anything above six to eight individuals leads to pockets of conversations, with attention flowing in and out of different pools. It is difficult to have one conversation, unless it is a topic that is of current interest or an issue that each feels strongly about. There are many obstacles for the tide of debate to swell in that situation, which can then be compounded by the presence of the butterflies or the bulls. Of course it is impossible to have a deep and meaningful conversation all of the time, nor is it probably desirable. However my heart starts pounding every time I see one peeking out of the bushes, and my shoulders slump (metaphorically) when it is quickly jerked out of sight.
I would like to end with a quote I recently read – “People like to acquire information, but they prefer to impart it”. Going through some of my earlier posts this statement summarizes my pomposity quite well, I must admit.
Some of these traits can coexist, creating a potent Molotov cocktail. Imagine a bullish butterfly! I have not mentioned another type who can also have an adverse impact, the Clownfish. They are the ones who can rapidly puncture the mood of a conversation with their flippant one-liners, but in general are not as lethal as the others mentioned before.
So then what makes for a good conversation? Is it the person, or is it the sound of their voice? Is it the delivery or is it the topic? Some of the most intelligent people can bore you to death as soon as they open their mouth, and conversely, buffoons can keep you entertained for hours. This is an important question as I consider an ability to hold a good conversation and to keep people engrossed as probably one of the greatest gifts. Also, for a person who experiences bouts of ADD at such times, I find myself rapidly phasing out of the inanities. All of us have inbuilt safety mechanisms, which ensure that we filter out puerile data extremely quickly, before it inundates us. I am by nature a serious person who prefers a deeper conversation, which prods and explores the topic at hand from all sides before a switch to another. If the topic is not adequately examined I feel a lack of fulfillment, almost a sense of denial, and I very quickly drift away mentally. I love a good argument and I definitely love to listen to someone who knows what he / she are talking about. It is always fascinating to listen to someone who has an in-depth understanding of an issue, or is passionate about her ideals. Agreement with the views expressed is not always essential; it is just an additional perquisite.
Einstein gave us the concept of relative time, and to me it is most evident during a conversation. A nice chat can make the hours fly, and vice versa some conversations can make it flow like treacle. I cannot say that I have been surprised though as to the differences in what makes for a good chat amongst people. Food, gossip, children seem to be the all time favorites with women, and I am sure that women would say that men can't talk of anything beyond sports, movies and sex. A lot of people prefer to avoid topics that polarize opinions; often times they find it too strenuous, sometimes do not have the depth of knowledge or understanding to express or defend their views, or are intrinsically uncomfortable with confrontations and disagreements. I am of the view (as expressed in the movie Matrix Reloaded) that you never really know someone until you have fought them (I refer to verbal jousting of course). A good debate clears the air, increases your store of knowledge and most importantly makes you get to know the other person infinitely better. A lively discussion will be remembered for years to come, unlike the generally insipid banter that is forgotten even before the lights are turned off for the day. I still remember in vivid details the debates that we used to have as kids in school, and carried on into college and early adulthood. Some of my best times were spent crossing idealogical swords with my sister in early days, and then my sister-in-law later on.
Another major factor that impacts a conversation is the size of the group. In general, the bigger the group the swifter is the descent to the lowest common denominator. Anything above six to eight individuals leads to pockets of conversations, with attention flowing in and out of different pools. It is difficult to have one conversation, unless it is a topic that is of current interest or an issue that each feels strongly about. There are many obstacles for the tide of debate to swell in that situation, which can then be compounded by the presence of the butterflies or the bulls. Of course it is impossible to have a deep and meaningful conversation all of the time, nor is it probably desirable. However my heart starts pounding every time I see one peeking out of the bushes, and my shoulders slump (metaphorically) when it is quickly jerked out of sight.
I would like to end with a quote I recently read – “People like to acquire information, but they prefer to impart it”. Going through some of my earlier posts this statement summarizes my pomposity quite well, I must admit.
No comments:
Post a Comment