language as contribution

by lee on February 1st, 2010
1 CommentComments

there is a depth of quiet i am constantly striving to achieve each day.  some days, i make choices that allow me another step toward this goal.  and other days, i make choices that add to the chaos.  the world is loud; it offers distraction at every turn.  we are all susceptible to it.  we must simply adapt; evolve to accept the fast pace and loud environment, and most importantly, learn to move slowly through it.  i am by no means masterful at this art.  i am merely a student in the world, learning from every experience.  i try to soak in the lessons, absorb them into my spirit so i can rely on them when times are hard.

i often have to remind myself of this.  each day i am alive, i am able to learn something.  each day i am able to learn something, i am able to live.  learning takes many forms.  it can be very literal: i go to a class, a teacher passes me knowledge,  i am tested.  other times it is more figurative: i take the time on my way to a coffee shop to feel the air as it enters my body, cold and crisp in the winter; to feel my feet in my shoes, on the sturdy but broken concrete as i walk.

when i am able to achieve some kind of quiet in this loud world, i am better able to focus on what is real.  the urge to disassociate from the things that are difficult; to feign ignorance in the face of a fiercely ugly reality can be strong.  what is real can be hard to see, hard to hear, and often hard to believe.  when we pass someone on the street asking for food, we often simply shake our head and look away.  when a story is told that challenges our understanding of reality, it is easy to just dismiss it as wrong.  we may close our eyes, turn our heads, put on headphones, dig in our heels, and hang on to what we think we know.  to resist change.

change is what keeps us alive.  literally, the cells of our bodies divide, the planets shift; life moves.  stagnancy is death.  as a people, we must monitor what it is we put into the world.  does it contribute to change?  does it contribute at all?  what are we bringing into the world?  what are we leaving behind?  i strongly believe that every action and every nonaction has an effect.  the food i eat, the things i buy, where i live, what i spend my money on, who i talk to, who i vote for, what i fight for, what i think about, what i write about, what i say, what i don’t say, and how i do or don’t say it matters.

i spend a lot of time with words, reading them, writing them, thinking them, saying them.  everybody has a thing.  words are my thing.  i try to choose my words thoughtfully, in every context.  recently, i have put a lot of thought into sarcasm.  what exactly is its purpose?  how does it contribute to conversation?  with this, as with everything, my history greatly informs my understanding.  and i have a long history with sarcasm as a deflective technique.  in fact, i used to use all language defensively.  now, i am dedicated to my own truth and carefully choose my words to communicate only what is real.  it is my desire to go even further that.  i hope through practice to someday only bring words into this world that have a purpose.

i have noticed that so many people i interact with use sarcasm regularly.  some people employ it as their main form of communication.  i’m not even sure if it is actually communication.  according to the meriam webster dictionary, sarcasm is “a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual.”  another definition i found, thanks to wikipedia, says sarcasm is the  “rhetorical device of using a characterization of something or someone in order to express contempt.  It is closely connected with irony, in that the two are often combined in the same statement.”  more often than not, sarcasm feels destructive.  it asserts the opposite of what is true in a tone meant to make the receiver of said comment feel inferior.   how is this okay?  and how is it that sarcasm has taken over as a main form of communication?

i use sarcasm.  but i don’t like it, not when i use it and not when other people do.  well timed wit and irony are amusing, and i definitely appreciate the variety that they add to communication.  but i wonder what we could achieve without it, if we all would just say what we mean.  think about how much more we would know about ourselves and each other.

every choice has a consequence; every action a reaction.  if my goal is to find quiet in the chaos, to learn from every moment, to welcome change, and to contribute with purpose, i need to make choices that allow for this.  i cannot know what is right for everyone, and i can only strive know what is right for me.  i want to be more real, even if it means saying less.  perhaps it is how i can say the most.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Categories: daily life

Comments

Feed
Trackback URL

  • Bethany

    A couple of things to think about:

    1. While all language is capable of displaying emotion, sarcasm/irony are especially suited for that particular goal. In some sense, they are supersocial forms of communication. 2. Sarcasm and irony are indirect. In a sense, they could be seen as nonconfrontational. They are a way of expressing something that the speaker could very well just flat out state. Think of it as a strategy.
    3. If you’re interested in theories about how communication works – sarcasm and irony included, you might want to check out Grice – his Cooperative Principle and Conversational Maxims.

Leave Comment

Commenting Options

Alternatively, you can create an avatar that will appear whenever you leave a comment on a Gravatar-enabled blog.