• About
  • Editorial Board
  • Advertise
  • Join Us
  • Archives
The Wellesley News -
  • News and Features
    • Students With Medically Restricted Diets Struggle to Eat On Campus
      Students With Medically Restricted Diets Struggle to Eat On Campus
    • Students find new ways to celebrate Diwali
      Students find new ways to celebrate Diwali
    • Changing COVID-19 regulations impact students’ mental health
      Changing COVID-19 regulations impact students’ mental health
    • News
      • News in Brief
      • Nation & World
      • President’s Corner
      • Senate Report
    • Features
      • Alumnae Spotlight
      • Eye on Science
      • Faculty Focus
      • LGBTQIA+ Column
  • Opinions
    • Wellesley, why can’t you meet our dietary needs?
      Wellesley, why can’t you meet our dietary needs?
    • The block system is a joke
      The block system is a joke
    • Spineless nonpartisanship: how the Girl Scouts convinced me they no longer care about girls
      Spineless nonpartisanship: how the Girl Scouts convinced me they no longer care about girls
    • Staff Editorial
    • Letters to the Editor
    • The Elephant in the Room
  • Arts
    • Music Performance Courses Adapt to an Altered Semester
      Music Performance Courses Adapt to an Altered Semester
    • Ben Wheatley’s adaptation of “Rebecca” fails to deliver compared to its classic counterpart
      Ben Wheatley’s adaptation of “Rebecca” fails to deliver compared to its classic counterpart
    • “Dash & Lily” Find Love, Stranded
      “Dash & Lily” Find Love, Stranded
    • Arts In The News
    • Reviews
    • Music Peek
  • Health and Wellness
    • No image
      Athletic impacts of Covid-19
    • No image
      A new kind of PE
    • No image
      Maintaining wellness as the cold sets in
    • Athlete of the Week
    • Boston Sports Update
    • The Vegan Digest
    • The SHE Corner
  • Miscellanea
    • No image
      Remote students experience existential crises; change class years in email signatures
    • President’s Column: The Butterfly Effect
      President’s Column: The Butterfly Effect
    • Your next on-campus romance isn’t going to work out
      Your next on-campus romance isn’t going to work out
    • The Artichoke
    • The Dose
    • The Olive Branch
    • Multimedia
      • Galleries
      • Infographics
      • Videos
By Lily Herold OpinionsNovember 7, 2018

Meaningful conversation is ensnared by social etiquette

Photo Courtesy of Artemisia Luk '21 Digital Editor

Incessant communication: an ever-present onslaught of “How are you’s” and “Hello’s”. Colleagues greet you with a smile and a dead-eyed stare; dinner table twaddle avoids the controversial. Words flit and flitter, restless as autumn leaves in turbulent air — this is the cacophony of the 21st century, the unremitting hubbub of a world governed by language.

The 21st century: the era of unending interaction, and yet we fail to say anything.  

Ironically, this cultural phenomenon — the act of talking itself — is not something we talk about. The boundaries of conversational etiquette, which generally exist as the unspoken “elephant” of every social interaction, must not remain undiscussed; if we’d like to engage in compelling discussion, we need to talk about smalltalk.

Especially in light of all the atrocities plaguing our nation and our world (re: the UN’s latest climate report, the polarization of what we once dubbed a “democracy,” and the normalization of derogatory rhetoric), it’s imperative that we engage in collaborative discourse. To avoid the discussion of hard-to-talk about topics means to sweep atrocity “under the rug” — to become a bystander and thereby a latent perpetrator. We as a society can’t continue simply saying “good” when asked how we’re doing. We are not “good.” We are, in fact, bad. And when we’re feeling bad — be our feelings related to the state of the world or the state of ourselves — we need to inform one another.

The unfortunate truth of the matter is this: social etiquette bolsters hollow conversation. Rather than partake in meaningful dialogue, we tend to turn to topics trite and timeworn: commuting times, weekend plans, and workplace obligations. All too often, we hide behind the guise of a smile, acting politely interested in the extremely boring trivialities of someone else’s life. Our darker, more complex musings are reserved for our own contemplation — shielded from the eyes of our contemporaries because, in today’s world, discussion of anything real or pertinent is deemed taboo.  

Silence, we believe, is ungainly. We live in perpetual fear of awkwardness, of introspection — instead of embracing pauses as moments rife with meaning, we seek to fill up these stretches of quiet with mindless chatter. Though those less adept in the art of idle prattle — alias smalltalk — are seen as being gauche and graceless, perhaps they’re merely reluctant to cower behind a facade of inauthenticity; perhaps they see no virtue in meekly babbling about nothing.

Yes, I realize that smalltalk may not be wholly unwarranted: to some degree, we all want to be liked, and there’s no crime in polite albeit meaningless conversation. But does anyone genuinely enjoy ingenuine banter? Shouldn’t language, which has been cultivated and perfected through centuries of oral and written history, be granted some respect? Smalltalk in Western society operates on a delicate construction of lies and artifice, and we’re usually able to recognize well-mannered chit-chat for what it is — a shallow attempt to be socially agile.

Bearing this in mind, it seems there exists a paradox in our modern day interactions: though we scorn falsity, we disdain discourtesy. Each time we peruse the aisles of Whole Foods — or perhaps take the dog for a stroll in the park — and find ourselves suddenly in the presence of a hapless acquaintance, we’re faced with a trying choice: to be rude, or politely insincere?  Though we generally take the latter route, we’re not thinking about the other person — instead, we’re conceptualizing a way to gracefully make our exit.

So why can’t we be genuinely interested in one another — or, for that matter, genuine at all?  If we ask too many questions, we’re nosy; too few, and we’re impertinent. In essence, we’re bound, with ropes thick and unyielding, by social etiquette; we’ve become actors in the world of our everyday.  

 

Share on

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • Google +
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
Previous articleAtheists have the ability to alter election outcomes
Next articleAfter Pittsburgh, we can’t give into fear

You may also like

A piece of pizza missing topings.

Wellesley, why can’t you meet our dietary needs?

The block system is a joke

Spineless nonpartisanship: how the Girl Scouts convinced me they no longer care about girls

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Email Newsletter

Sign up to receive our weekly digest in your inbox

* indicates required

Top Articles

Sorry. No data so far.

Recent Tweets

Tweets by @Wellesley_News

The independent student newspaper of Wellesley College since 1901.

Sign up to receive our weekly digest in your inbox

* indicates required

  • About
  • Editorial Board
  • Advertise
  • Join Us
  • Archives
COPYRIGHT © 2021 THE WELLESLEY NEWS
Back to top