Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Sites | Writers | Advertise | My Orble | Login

Quotable Quips - by Banana Mango

Quotable Quips - October 2006

"If you're bored then you're boring"

The fear of being boring is very closely related to the fear of rejection or disapproval. We’ve experienced the awkwardness that comes about when you’re in an interaction and you’re not connecting with the other people or person. We know that this generally leads to an abrupt end of the said interaction. Being boring, or awkward, does have some very real and undesirable consequences; not caring what other people think can be quite an unpleasant path to take.

It's easy for people on the social outer to go to a club, see a whole bunch of people in groups laughing and dancing about, observe themselves doing none of these things, and conclude that there must be something wrong with them, that they are not sociable. While it is true that at that particular point in time and place they might not be actively sociable, it is a far stretch from there to conclude that they are not capable of a positive social interaction, which is essentially what they’re telling themselves.


Funnily enough, when one internalises the belief, or more accurately, the knowledge that they are capable of having a good time with other people at social gatherings, then that belief becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. How do we go about getting these beliefs, then? Affirmations seem to hold some weight in the pop psychology field, but I'm not a big fan of them, at least not in isolation. First of all, they rarely work for any prolonged period of time, and secondly, when they do work, they work by the person denying what their true problem is. "I am interesting. The more someone gets to know me, the more they will come to like me." Great in theory, but all that has to happen is for the person to think back to last Saturday night when they were in total observer mode at a nightclub, and the affirmation fails. Personal experience holds the strongest weight in forming one's opinion on anything, and so it should.


This is the so-called vicious cycle that is present in so many areas of life: one needs confidence to have successful social experiences, but in order to gain that confidence they need successful experiences. There is no one way to get around this dilemma, rather a handful of methods which all work to varying degrees.

Firstly, though, I want to create a working definition of “confidence”. I will define confidence as the belief that your actions will bring about the desired results. Some might say that you don’t need confidence to have a successful social interaction. What if you’re feeling like absolute shit, so you call your friend up to unload some emotional baggage? Surely that doesn’t require confidence? After all, you’re already on good terms with your friend, so there’s no risk involved. What’s present here, though, is a strong confidence in that person, which is closely tied to trust. If there weren’t a confidence or trust in that friend, then it would be difficult to call them about your problems. Any positive interaction requires mutual confidence and trust. One can be negative about anything, except that which allows them the opportunity to express their negativity. I would go as far to say that any action, possibly even any thought, requires some sort of confidence or trust in order to exist. *

Secondly, we need a working definition for “successful social experience”. A social experience is any experience involving interactions with other people where there is no particular reason, business or similar, for the interaction. The success of the experience is measured in degrees, so it’s not a black and white concept. It will be partly subjective. Basically, we all have social goals, whether we know it or not, when involved in an interaction. Success is in either meeting or exceeding these goals. But what if you’re happy with an interaction you’ve had, and the other person walks off thinking you’re a weirdo? My answer would be that if your goal was simply to walk away from the interaction happy, then that’s a pretty crummy goal. A more prudent goal would involve the other party, for example, to have the other person walk away feeling happy, and with a good impression of me. This will require a certain intuition, which is a very vital cog in the socialising machine. I used to know this guy with serious psychological problems, and he had this trait: he would engage with people, thinking that the other person was really charmed by him, when in reality, they thought he was a nutball. In saying that, there is a fine line, between self-confidence and self-delusion. In fact, I’ve noticed that sometimes they even overlap. I’ll say more about this in a later blog.

The first piece of advice I would give in gaining social confidence is this: for the vast majority of people, we do have successful experiences that we can draw upon for confidence. Simply just recalling these experiences in one’s mind will often be enough to gain some sort of confidence. It’s almost as if through recalling this experience, we re-experience it, which gives us a certain amount of confidence. You can see that it’s not really about breaking the vicious cycle in this case, rather just about finding a loophole to enter it. This will be a common theme.

The second is to understand that nobody is “up” all the time. Personality is a malleable thing, and will change somewhat according to its environment, eg, the surrounding places, people, amount of sleep one’s had, what drugs they’ve had, etc. Creating circumstances and environments where you know you will excel in is another recurring theme in success, in any field. Again, more will be said about this at a later time.

That’s all for now, stay tuned for part 3 of “if you’re bored then you’re boring”.

* = I've put in bold font phrases which I believe to be fairly quotable.
149
Vote
Shared on
   


Familiarity Breeds Contempt

October 12th 2006 05:33
"Familiarity Breeds Contempt"

This saying has its origins in one of Aesop’s fables:

When first the Fox saw the Lion he was terribly frightened, and ran away and hid himself in the wood. Next time however he came near the King of Beasts he stopped at a safe distance and watched him pass by. The third time they came near one another the Fox went straight up to the Lion and passed the time of day with him, asking him how his family were, and when he should have the pleasure of seeing him again; then turning his tail, he parted from the Lion without much ceremony.
"Familiarity Breeds Contempt"

The lesson is that the fear of something, fascination and awe, is reduced through getting to know it better. Matthew 13:57: “But Jesus said unto them, “a prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.”” This verse is explained by a poster at http://www.phrases.org.uk: “there is the problem of a prophet being without honour in his home town - that people who know you well are not so inclined to recognise the exceptional in you”. I can really relate to this – when I play guitar to somebody for the first time, they are usually impressed (I won’t go as far as to say they’re in awe), but when I play to somebody who hears me play all the time, like my uncle or my brother, it’s nothing exceptional. In the same way, I have a friend who’s quite well known, and he’ll have people come up to him and go, “oh! You’re so and so from so and so aren’t you!” but to me, he’s just Craig.

This illustrates a positive application of the principle, because if I were in awe of Craig, it would be hard to remain his mate. Also written on phrases.org.uk is this:

a high-wire electrical engineer does not get freaked by the threat of 50,000 volts, nor does an aquarium worker get worried by the proximity of a shark. What look like great dangers to lay people, can appear routine to professionals - even threatening abstracts such as the law can be seen as non-threatening if you are used to them.

Hard to argue with that; there’s no doubt that being familiar with something, becoming desensitised to it, can have a positive effect, and I’m sure that in evolutionary terms, that is the reason it still exists in our psychological make-up.

Unfortunately, however, there are some negative repercussions of possessing this ability to become de-fascinated with things. As a kid in primary school, I had a best friend called Andrew Walsh. We were both crazy about Sega Megadrives, so I used to go to his place and vice versa all the time; we’d play a ton of games, Sonic the Hedgehog being a favourite. I remember this cool game called Haunted as well where you controlled a bunch of ghosts, and you had to haunt your house so that the new humans who just moved in will be scared out. Anyway, I digress. The point is, I went to Andrew’s place all the time and eventually we got sick of each other. Later on in my childhood, after I’d moved areas and changed schools, I had a new mate called Josh. He was a top guy, a real social butterfly, but he would come over every single day, uninvited. After testing my nerves for some time, he knocked on the door one morning and I told him I didn’t want him around that day. He was devastated, the poor guy. I was such a turd to him, but what could I do? Familiarity breeds contempt, and that’s exactly what I felt for him at that point in time.

Having learnt this lesson, it’s hard for me to comprehend how people can get married. Or as a matter of fact, I can see how and why people would want to get married, but what’s harder to understand is how they can stay happily married. I guess the ridiculously high divorce rate suggests that in general, they don’t stay happily married. And I’m not surprised.
151
Vote
Shared on
   


Don't judge a book by its cover

October 6th 2006 11:17
“Don’t judge a book by its cover”

Origin, according to
http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/6/messages/1061.html:

"Don't judge things by their appearance only. Originated in the United States. First attested in the journal 'American Speech' (1929). Has been used in Britain since 1954 (Murder in Haste' by H. Gardiner. Found in varying forms..." "Random House Dictionary of Popular Proverbs and Sayings" (1996) by Gregory Y. Titelman (Random House, New York, 1996).


I’ve been called “superficial” and “judgemental” several times in my life. But am I really so bad? Or just looking after my own interests? There seems to be a line of thought that those who are influenced by pretty appearances are of a lesser moral character than those who don’t. My argument is that we are all influenced by appearances, to varying degrees, and that there is no moral advantage in ignoring them anyway. Yes, it might be, on occasion, more rewarding to invest in something or someone to try to get a deeper perspective. But at worst, this is a crime that only affects oneself, and therefore shouldn’t concern anyone else.

I remember reading an article a while ago about the current state of the music business, how there is an abundance of young Australian bands trying to “make it”. Triple J, in fact, receives so many demos that the music producer is only able to give each one a 30 second listen. If this were the case a couple of centuries ago, we may never have had Beethoven; it’s just not the type of music that rewards a mere single listen. In our highly commercialised society where everything is ultimately evaluated by the amount of financial revenue it brings in, superficiality is rewarded, even it is somewhat lacking in meaning, because it offers an instant hit of pleasure, rather than something more profound which takes a bit of investment before it can be appreciated. Like they say, “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.”

What I’m getting at is that in our state of crowded anonymity, we are being forced to judge books by their covers, or more accurately, people who do so are more rewarded. The world just will not wait for someone who wants to take a bit longer to get to know a partner, to see past their initial prejudices. There’s simply no time, there are too many people. If there are, say, 50 people at a party, I don’t have time to deeply engage with every one of them. I probably have time to talk to about 10 at the most, and the ones that I happen to interact with will most probably be the ones who have the best “covers”, in reality, probably the people who are most similar to me in terms of age, dress, and even nationality.

Looking at the original quote itself, it would seem to me that a book exists solely in what is written in its pages; that’s all that the author is responsible for, and it’s the publisher who decides what to decorate it with on the cover. Quite frankly, I don’t give a damn what cover they choose to whack on the front of On the Road by Jack Keroauc; it will still be my favourite book of all time. Some covers will be more in line with how I perceive the book than others, but nevertheless, it is not a bonafide part of the book, and therefore should not be judged as part of the package either.

So why do publishers publish the same book with different covers? Why do they employ graphic design graduates to create covers that appeal to the eye? The answer is simple: because the book will sell more copies with a pretty cover. It’s easy to infer from this, then, that people DO judge books by their covers. A lot. Is this a bad thing? Well, if so, it’s a victimless crime. One might say, however, that they might be missing out by simply picking out the book with the best cover. They might be missing out on the masterpiece that has sandpaper as it cover. Is this true though? Who says that the set of books with bland covers has a higher overall quality of books than the set of books with great covers? The good cover is irrelevant, and I don’t blame the buyer for not wanting to read every single book in the joint before making a decision as to what to purchase. Hell, I don’t.
172
Vote
Shared on
   


More Posts
1 Posts
3 Posts
1 Posts
11 Posts dating from September 2006
Email Subscription
Receive e-mail notifications of new posts on this blog:

Banana Mango's Blogs

0 Vote(s)
0 Comment(s)
0 Post(s)
Moderated by Banana Mango
Copyright © 2006 2007 2008 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]