When I lived in England, I loved the way the red Telephone booths stood out against the backdrop of the beautiful English countryside. In autumn, the red against the muted earth tones; in summer the red complementing all the luscious hues of green, blue and yellow; in winter, the red so easily seen against the black, white and greys; and in spring, the red stood out as a beacon heralding the promise of magnificent colours to come.
I recently watched a documentary in which they showed a Telephone booth "graveyard", a final resting place for the many now superfluous Telephone booths. There they were these magnificent red creations, these tools of communication, now made all but redundant surpassed by "mobile" phones.
Somehow it seemed kind of sad to me because those phone booths were more than just a place to make a call, they were also a shelter in bad weather, a meeting place, a space to find some privacy, a safe space to wait, and they were there for anyone and everyone to use for a few pennies. (Cents)
Before "mobile" phones, when we made phone calls, we made them on fixed-lines, we called a place or an address if you will, but nowadays when we call mobile(cell)phones, we call people;
and we people carry our phones with us everywhere, so theoretically, we have access to each other 24/7. That's if we know the numbers, because there is no public directory for mobile(cell)phone numbers unlike the public directory that goes with fixed-line phones. This to me is very interesting, because there seems to be somewhat of a paradox here; our social networks sustained through the use of mobile phones are very private (no public directory) yet the conversations we have often take place in public spaces (parks, beaches, restaurants, coffee shops, libraries etc..).
Perhaps the use of mobile phones has redefined our sense of what constitutes personal and public space and, to a varying degree, depending on the cultural/social behaviour of the country we live in?
Although there are now probably more and better than ever tools for us to use to communicate with each other, are we also getting "better" at understanding each other?
When we communicate, we are basically conveying information and, to do so there is a sender> message>receiver. This is how Wikipedia describes it:
Thought: First, information exists in the mind of the sender. This can be a concept, idea, information, or feeling.
Encoding: Next, a message is sent to a receiver in words or other symbols.
Decoding: Lastly, the receiver translates the words or symbols into a concept or information that a person can understand.
Thing is; the meaning the sender has in mind when communicating a message may be different to the meaning that the receiver attaches to the message.
(Perhaps this applies especially to text messages, hence the invention of emoticons)
Misunderstandings often come about when the sender and the receiver have different interpretations of the meaning of a message.
Examples: "I'll be there soon". "Soon" for the sender meaning in an hour, "soon" meaning within a few minutes for the receiver. "I can't see you tonight, I'm busy" for the sender meaning having too many things to do, but for the receiver it may be interpreted as "You're not as important to me as this other thing I am doing".
What we say or do, we filter through our belief systems/worldviews/understanding of the world we live in, and so do others. Interestingly, we often assume that others have the same views as us, we may even think of our views as "commonsense", so we often forget to ask if their understanding/interpretation is the same as ours.
Example: "When you said .........did you mean?" "This is my interpretation of.........what is yours?"
"Am I understanding you right? This is my understanding....."
Words get most of their meaning in their context; "he's yellow" could for instance mean he is jaundiced, painted with yellow paint, wearing a yellow rain coat, or "weak", but put in context the meaning would be clearer: "His skin tone is almost yellow due to jaundice."
"I can't see you tonight, I'm busy" if rephrased into "I can't see you tonight because I have a paper (or whatever the reason) to finish which is due tomorrow", alleviates a number of possible misunderstandings.
"Misunderstanding must be nakedly exposed before true understanding can begin to flourish.”
(Philip Yancey)
"I feel trapped!" said Bob. What does that mean to you?
What if I told you that Bob was in a coal mine when he said it? What if I told you that Bob was playing chess when he said it, or that he was referring to his obesity issue, or that he was stuck in peak-hour traffic when he said it?
Whether we are communicating through the spoken or written word, words are the most effective when the sender and the receiver attach the same meaning to them and the more precise and clear we are, the less chance there is for misunderstandings.
What someone says and what we hear; what someone writes and what we read; can be worlds apart.
When the sender and receiver are congruous on meaning and context, understanding is likely to be the outcome.
Returning to the phone booths and fixed-lines.......
The phone-booth was/is a private space, an enclosed space, dedicated to speaking with someone one on one, and is there perhaps not something worthwhile in that? All focus on the person on the other end of the line; because isn't communication about dialogue, listening as well as speaking, sending as well as receiving?
No comments:
Post a Comment