To Give Up on Words

This article meant a lot to me because I've noticed a desire recently, more so now that I'm living with more people, for there to always be conversation. If no one is talking I often find myself turning on talk shows and sitcoms, though I almost never watch television. I don't think I could tell you even one thing they were talking about, but the fact that it's there has an odd calming effect. I used to dislike constant talking, and I still have a lot of trouble talking to people before I get to know them, but that too has started to change.

I found it really interesting that the Apache view of silence is so different from how it is viewed in most American societies. Here, if someone were to not introduce a new person or not speak to them at all, it would be considered extremely rude no matter the circumstances surrounding their meeting. The influence of context on their length and depth of speech is amazing. The author detailed those different contexts with examples, which made it easy to connect the patterns. Over all, I feel like the conditions are too complex to fully understand as someone who grew up in a culture so overloaded with communication. We tend to believe that the best way to find out about someone is to talk to them, whereas the Navajo tend more toward observation of their actions and behavior. This actually seems like a better system to me, but mostly for the reason that it is more difficult to lie with actions than with words.

Another interesting point to be was that Basso focused on explaining what all of the situations had in common, particularly the conclusion that it was not the physical situation that mattered (as we would say it would be inappropriate to talk somewhere like say an opera), but the relationship to the person and their emotional and mental state. It seems to be a system drawn out of respect, consideration, and careful forethought that focuses more on the people outside one's self. Their concept of leaving an individual to mourn alone for example, is about not rehashing the incident to the individual. In our culture, the practice of giving condolences is argued to be about helping the individual, but really serves to make it known that we, the persons speaking, cared and are also upset. Overall it seemed to be more of a question of a selfless communication system that fell in stark contrast to the I-centric one used by most Americans.