As our class has transpired, a topic that has personally interested me in the idea of taking the next step in communication. Perhaps this topic interested me because at the time of reading the articles on “nexting” I was having fight with my boyfriend and thinking, “hey this isn’t going to swell now but I can take the next step to change the direction of it.” Or maybe because the idea of nexting is so broad. Taking the next step requires a lot more than the utterance of words and this whole idea, in my opinion is what defines interpersonal communication.
Through reading the blogs of Steph’s previous course I came across a number of interesting and insightful suggestions and beliefs. In <a href=http://aplaceinspace.wordpress.com/2008/02/26/what-are-youwe-going-to-produce-com352/>What are you/we going to produce?!</a> Steph begins by saying explaining that our words matter more than we “imagine” them too. “Words matter, obviously, in the immediate act of communicating something: the choice of language (technically, diction) – one person (say, the “giver”) either “transmits” a message faithful to what he or she intends or fails to do so. Likewise, others who hear the words either “receive” the “message” as it was “meant,” or fail to do so.” We do not always realize this, but in communicating, our words do not always convey the message we are trying to transmit to the opposite party. To effectively “relay” a message from your mind to that of another – a number of facets must be taken into consideration. A few, as we have discussed are – relationship to the person, culture, ethnicity, values, age, so on and so forth.
Although we “tend” to (and I say tend to because, I tend to and those I know tend to but you may not tend to, of course) respond immediately to those we are in a conversation with, without always thinking out the best response option thoroughly (especially in the heat of the moment), this becomes problematic. In <a href=https://learning.umassonline.net/webct/urw/lc26190.tp0/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct>Consistency and consensus: mutually exclusive? </a> Steph suggests, “Before you respond to the question, think about:
1. your vision for the endproduct and
2. the process you value most for getting “there”
This is in effect, nexting. Thinking about the next move in order to achieve the end result you so require. So why are we always so quick to respond without thinking it out. As Steph says, “what’s the rush?”
“My mind has been spinning all week with the conversation we began trying to distinguish among representation, symbolism, and mimesis. Do we want to (re)produce something of art or something of knowledge? Can we attempt both?” Steph pondered over this question in <a href=https://learning.umassonline.net/webct/urw/lc26190.tp0/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct>Can we articulate the frame(s) emergent in our interaction?</a> Although the context does not entirely relate to the idea of nexting, the basis here is the concept of “reproducing something symbolic.” Our thoughts of course are just that – symbols in our mind that through proper execution can become verbalized words with meanings and representations to others, but how DO we do this? What is the process required to reach that point. While fighting with my boyfriend (this is a fight we have had many times) I thought to myself, “WHY does he not understand, is he stupid? Is he being stubborn? How can he disagree? This is so clear!” But then I thought, wait. Maybe it is not him, it is me. Maybe, I am not taking the next step effectively enough – maybe the notions, feelings, intangible “things” are not being conveyed the right way.
I remembered Steph’s post on <a href=https://learning.umassonline.net/webct/urw/lc26190.tp0/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct> Audience: to imagine or ignore?</a>. What caught my eye about this was Steph’s theory that, “In terms of communication – particularly in terms of the relationships that communication makes possible – anticipation can be divided into two broad categories, which (for simplicity’s sake) I will call “negative” and “positive.” In other words, I can anticipate the worst and craft my communication to either defend against ‘the bad’ or offensively assert ‘the good’ (roughly, what I desire); or I can anticipate the best and design my discourse to minimize ‘the bad’ and emphasize ‘the good.’” Anticipation is an interesting concept in interpersonal communication. Anticipating is a step we must take before we next. However, this idea is interesting, especially after this past weeks readings on maintaining the self. They go hand in hand because we must anticipate the options we have on responding, how the other person will take this response, and of course how it defines you. For instance, knowing my boyfriend (this is the background info I spoke about before – relationship to “opponent,” their beliefs, their culture, etc) I know I can anticipate the worst if I continue to argue or more positive outcomes if I can reason. He is a softy and the moment I back down he levels with me. However, I have to anticipate that by backing down – I will be perceived as pushover and all of the negative connotations that come with that. BUT, just because I see that form of action to scream “push-over,” does he? How do I know and how do I find that out? This is the bridge that stands between two different people’s thoughts and mutual understanding of these thoughts. In my opinion cross the bridge is the most difficult part of communicating.
Tags: Add new tag
