We speak to communicate and become engrossed in a singular experiential method. The sole way of connection is through the words. This all too wrong. We can experience by mere conversation. It is the sounds spoken that spark experience.
Communication is more than speech. Speech is verbal annunciation but a medium through connection. It is mode of informative transmission but is surface level communication. Conversation imbues agendas and manipulation. Whether in good faith or not, words are a form of delegation. They promote meaning through interpretation. Speech is a marker of lacking experience. Speech steals that experience through sound making. The focus is on the words we say not on the experience we feel. We lose sight of the encounter in the dialogical flow. We talk and discuss all the while looking past each other.
We speak but do not listen. We are too eager to reply that we end up speaking past one another. The irony is the dialogue is two monologues. Asides with audience participation. A student interrupting the teacher’s lesson. It is not a moment of equals but of imbalance. Trying to dominate the other with words. Choosing the genre and filing precious opinions on the others. It is not mutual consent but a barraging mirage. Even in a mutual space, the desire to respond and feeling to interject overpowers the other. The speaker is overwhelmed by an aggressive interrupter. The listener’s points need to be made and he takes charge. With this interjection the speaker loses his train of thought moving to a divergent strand in the conversation. This rupture is manifested by egoism.
The dialogical rupture is a moment of arrogance. The rupture signifies one’s feeling of self-importance. My points are more important at this moment. It is not an offensive intention but it becomes an egregious act. It forbids the conversation from heading in one direction and moves it to another track. The original destination is voided to oblivion. The rupture continues smoothly but it is off course. The new path has a new destiny, one unintentional from the conversational origin. Man’s greed and pride intercepts the conversational flow. The speaker’s fluidity is halted and moved back into place. It is a encounter by the listener’s fervent language. The listener responds to the speaker’s words but he stuns the speaker in his tracks. The speaker must regroup but this offence strikes discord in the experiential moulding.
The experience is welded with silence. Internalising each and every word coherently. Not just hearing the speaker but listening carefully. Actively partaking in the experience. Verbal response is unnecessary. Activity does not require sounds, it requires engagement. Body language and emotional intent is firmly reasonable. Though these latter factors may affect the speaker’s flow, it is a sharper less rupturing idea. It is a less blunt rejection of the speaker. Listening is a silent manifestation of interest. Disinterest is permitted but make it clear. Passive intent is disheartening and demoting. The engaged listener stares into the cold eyes of the speaker. Focused and intrigued by the speaker’s voice. His words are filled with prowess and zeal. Words carry emotion and meaning. To listen fully is to attain the full capacity of the rhetoric. In a sense internalising the meta-level.
The listener can only achieve this feet in silence. Speech is a commodity but a central facet of human life. Silence is but a temporary measure in the life of man. It is a time of meditation and introspection. Yet these moments of reflection are guided by growth intentions. Speech focuses on the external while silence focuses on the internal. Silence does mean utter void. It means the nullification of sounds in the air. Speech is never ceased. Silence is to speak to the self. To talk to one’s body and ponder about personal development. Reflection needs internal speech. Communication is completed through voice but it done calmly and slowly. Silence is self-concentration and existential expression. The listener is silent but he speaks to himself about the information transmitted. Speech is never turned off, it is manifested internally to focus externally.
The brain is always working and responding internally to the speaker. The moment of reception energises the mind to manufacture a proper response. It is not extensive pondering but a quick rationalisation. The external is mitigated for the internal to operate efficiently. The speaker is preoccupied talking. His speech lacks internal dialogue. He must stop to speak internally. Gathering his thoughts is a moment of internal conversation. External speech does not contain conscious internal speech. A pause is the only merit to re-energising the internal discussion. The flow of conversation is instinctive. It does not relay the condensed deductive version. It is spitballing. A careless method of speech. Pauses reinvigorate a cyclical dialogue to coherently express the ideas. Self-awareness better empowers speech fluidity.
The speaker’s external indulgence leaves the experience. The experience is for the silent. The emotive factors only heighten for the silent. The speaker is manifesting the experience onto others unable to feel himself. He is bringing others into his domain but does not sense the power of his words. His words are only captivated in the listener’s response. The other’s interest and fascination pulls the speaker into the experience. The words affect the listener while the body language affects the speaker. The speaker preaches while the listener indulges. Mutuality springs in the encounter. Gazing at one another and focused. It is beyond words. They are medium but are not the purpose. The mechanism not the moment. Speech charges interest while listening inspires pride. A partnership of a deep experience washed by routine expression.
No comments:
Post a Comment