This post is in many ways connected to my previous post on ""why we blog."" There, I discussed issues of identity and free expression. However, the issue of interpersonal communication is perhaps the most important of all.
Sometimes I reflect on the nature of some of my favorite activities: reading (be it fiction, journalism etc.), listening to music, watching movies. An element common to these three things is that they are all media for communication. Even when we're not directly interacting with people, we still seek to connect with them.
Of course, however much you make like some of the above activities, none are nearly so prominent in the lives of most people as the act of everyday conversation. Millions of profiles throughout the land proclaim their masters' interest in ""good conversation"" or some variation on that theme.
What's the deal with all this obsessive communication? Natural as it is to us, when you think about it, animals and other organisms seem to thrive and reproduce very well without all the intensive discussion and dialogue etc etc.
A psychologist named Pennebaker made his name by proving that writing down one's thoughts or expressing them to a confidant on a regular basis enhances health, in addition to mental well-being. A less well-known guy I read in one class made the argument that many mood disorders (e.g. depression, anxiety) and other psychiatric conditions are due to social rejection.
But why? What reason is there for our driving desire to talk to another person?
What's more frustrating is that sometimes it seems, no matter how hard we try, we'll never really know what it's like to be another person, how they feel, what they think...we try so desparately, interpreting (usually subconsciously) body language, little statements or tones...most conversation seems so trivial, and we treasure those moments when we do seem to break through to a deeper level. But what do we really know, even then? and isn't that moment transient? I mean, it's nice while it lasts, but the relationship could easily sour the next day.
On the most basic level (the neural level), what a word means to you is almost certainly not what it means to me. That's because we learn the meanings of words via complex processes of association. To take an example from Waking Life (a really cool movie), my concept of love is based on my relationships with my family first, then with the girls I dated in grade school, high school etc...plus, of course, all the movies and songs about love (how many aren't about love?), and I somehow integrate this into a distinct conception of the meaning of the word. But you've had different familial relationships, different boy or girl friends, seen different movies, attributed different levels of significance to each...
and how about the significance of eye contact? this is even more mysterious to me. eye contact plays a crucial role in social interaction. many ""experts"" have noted its central role in communicating interest in a speaker or affection towards a prospective or actual partner. it also plays a role in aggressive encounters - intense eye contact is often present in the build-up to a fight. one study demonstrated that the body has a real physiological reaction to ""mutual gaze.""
You could say that the significance of eye contact is a learned, culture-bound phenomenon. But, so far as I know, eye contact plays pretty much the same role cross-culturally. newborn babies show intense interest in the eyes of other people.
but why? what's actually in an eye? you can't see someone else's thoughts. its just a bunch of cells, light receptive cells, in an exquisitely crafted perceptive device.
another interesting question is the role of content. on the one hand, we all have particularly interests that we would prefer to discuss. but ultimately, the key seems to be maintaining animated dialogue. content doesn't enter into the picture, from this view. its just the pure association with another person, and the exchange of words, as if that's somehow reaching beyond...
could our desperate desire for connection reflect an internal drive to reach the eternal? some theologians have conceptualized much of religious ritual and practice as being a representation of a reaching out to the infinite, but surely infinite can never be reached - I find this idea echoed by our quest for inter-personal communication.
this topic is far from exhausted in my mind. I'm just hoping to bring greater clarity to my thinking by getting some ideas down - that's the reason for these wordy thought blogs. if anyone actually reads them, I'd love some feedback...a little, y'know, interaction...
No comments:
Post a Comment