Some more writing - Blog 25

Here is a redrafted version of my introduction. I played with this a long time to get across the things I needed to, but I am still unsure how the overall flow is working, or if this is an important factor.

Introduction

Almost everyone can describe an experience they have had when a conversation about religion came up unexpectedly. One of the most common ways this experience is characterized is awkward. What makes this situation so awkward? Are these conversations doomed to be forever labeled as such, or can something be done to help them be natural? To discover these answers, I chose to research the causes of awkwardness in religious conversations and make an effort to develop guidelines which could help these conversations function more naturally and effectively. Specifically, I hoped to find that phrasing and word choice play a part in how natural a religious conversation feels to the recipient.

For the purposes of this paper, a religious conversation is any which is directed by the believer of a religion and focuses on the topic of religion. Because Christianity is the faith I am most familiar with, I found it easiest to reference Christian-based religious discourse in my research. Most commonly, awkward religious conversations are those involving proselytization, or what a Christian might calling sharing one’s faith. Although coercion and insensitivity are frequently topics which arise when discussing this topic, for the success of my paper it was necessary to limit my focus strictly to awkwardness. However, as will be disclosed, those guidelines which guide an unawkward conversation are by nature those which guide one of respect and sensitivity.

For my purposes, awkwardness is considered to be the feeling of tension one has in a situation of discomfort. It is an internal feeling usually developed in a social context when something unpleasant or unexpected happens. Awkwardness is a problem for people because it not only creates temporary discomfort, but also makes them less likely to enter into that type of situation again. I believe that awkwardness in religious conversations is not necessary and can be avoided by following particular guidelines and by developing greater sensitivity to the comfort level of one’s conversation partner.

Although plenty of Christian literature considers the “how to’s” of sharing one’s faith, little is said about the topic of awkwardness. Few consider the perspective of the recipient, including any discussion of their comfort level. Phrasing and diction, as far as I could find, are left out entirely as possible factors. The methods of writing studies, especially that of discourse analysis, are particularly useful for this field of study. It is important to contribute a discussion of discourse into that of religious conversation because it is so much a part of how these conversations function. The success, sensitivity, and comfort level of these conversations will hinge on many factors. It is necessary to consider language features specifically play a role so that we can consider specific moves to avoid when aiming for a natural religious conversation.

Some writing i have so far -blog 23

This is a draft of my literature review. I've also done some work on the intro but it wasn't clear enough to put up here.

I began my research with an article by Benjamin Cline titled “Reaching Others: The Rhetoric of Proselytizing and Community of a Christian Campus Organization”. This article describes a Christian college group and discusses how its outreach methods are a type of rhetoric. Next, this article discusses how proselytizing can be done with sensitivity. Using another researcher’s discussion of Rhetorical sensitivity, Cline develops a list of seven criteria for creating a sensitive christian rhetoric. These criteria, although intended for sensitivity, work well as a way to discover potential causes of awkwardness.

The first guideline Cline calls “sensitivity to role playing”. “The sensitive proselytizer is sensitive to the role that religious rhetors are playing within a particular scene…and recognizes there are times not to play that role”.(29)  What this means is that a Christian, for example, should understand that there are times and settings which are appropriate for sharing his/her faith. People do not expect to be approached about religion at any random time. This is why a sudden shift in conversation to this topic, or a surprising approach from a stranger with a tract, may feel more like an ambush than a natural conversation.

Cline further expands on this concept through a discussion of Kairos. This Greek term refers to the idea of taking advantage of the appropriate moment. It again reflects the understanding that there is a time and a place where religious conversations will seem less weird. Specifically, we must consider when would feel appropriate for the listener, given the context and setting. This idea was frequently referenced in my discussions with others. Almost exclusively, the awkward gospel conversations that people describe were those that “came up out of nowhere”. I refer to this concept as an awareness to context. A topic that comes up in an unusual or unexpected context can create a feeling of discomfort. 

When the topic of a conversation shifts in an unusual or enexpected way, it creates discomfort as the listener tries to adjust. Cline references an example in which he witnessed certain members of his christian organization going out and approaching students … (pg 79_

A second cause of discomfort that I will focus on is the use of what many Christians jokingly refer to as “christianese”. Cline discusses avoiding “in-group jargon” as the second guideline because it can be easily misunderstood and, in a sense, marginalizes those who don’t have a familiarity with Christianity. When you use specialized lingo with someone who is not familiar with it, they will likely feel uncomfortable with the conversation. In addition, particular phrases can serve as signals that the conversation is about to get weird, cuing the listener to feel a sense of tension. In fact, I believe phrasing alone is the best giveaway that a person is about to begin proselytizing.  Once the listener realizes that this is what’s happening, discomfort ensues as they try to decide, internally, how to handle the situation.

This second guideline is less talked about in Christian materials for how to proselytize, yet I think it is one of the most crucial aspects of creating a natural conversation. The article mentions, “certainly, inititating someone into any worldview is to initiate them into the vocabulary of that worldview.” Using in-group jargon with someone who is out of the group is one thing that creates awkwardness. In fact, this idea of specialized lingo is referenced in articles about natural conversation, it is part of not leaving out certain people. You don’t talk in lingo that only one person can understand. It is better to work from a place that everyone can contribute. It is natural that religious ideas will come out in religious terms for the P who is used to saying them that way in their religious circle. However, for the person with no background in that religion, the terminology can create discomfort or unease. For one thing, it is rude to presume knowledge of someone else, and use of a fancy term or phrase presumes that the person knows what it means. For another, it is uncomfortable to be in “over one’s head” or be talking about something that you don’t have familiarity with.

As the Cline article shows, there are certain expectations that guide a proper conversation. These guidelines usually remain in the realm of the unspoken; they are social skills which are developed in life but perhaps never openly stated. I looked into several short blogs and online postings concerning the etiquette of conversation in order to pin down these social guidelines. I thought these would be helpful because an awkward-free religious conversation must first and foremost be an unawkward conversation in general.

The article “The Art of Conversation” explains some of the major Do’s and Don’ts for a “a laid-back, casual manner that sets people immediately at ease”. Being put at ease is of course the opposite of feeling awkward. One should tailor the conversation to the listener, which means sticking to topics both people can and want to interact about. Another point is to listen more than you talk. Listening is a critical aspect of conversation ability which signals your respect for the other person. It also gives you valuable feedback to decide what to talk about and what to the other person may not want to talk about. This is critical in the setting of a gospel conversation, for if the person guiding the conversation is listening well, they should be able to take cues from the other person on whether or not they’re interested.

Another standard social etiquette the article references is to taking your turn. The article states “A conversation is a group project”. Again, this feels like an obvious fact that a good conversation will involve give and take. A proper discussion is not one which one person dominates or direct, but a free flow of ideas between two or more people. Henrik Edberg references this idea in his blog post about 10 mistakes in conversation. He says, “ No one will be that impressed if you “win” every conversation.” This is true and can be very tricky for the christian to incorporate in their habits. People don’t like to feel like you are trying to “do” something when you are talking with them (likely the reason why rhetoric in general has so much criticism). The feeling that someone is trying to hijack the conversation and have the need to drive home a point is certainly a discomforting one, and also does not suggest that the one person has much respect for the other.

Some work on the analysis -blog 22

These are just some notes i took in my initial analysis of the interview, prior  to the class we had on how to do an analysis.

Setting/context

phrasing

Major ideas in interview:

Suddenness of the topic switch (example of the boy’s convo) calls it jarring, unrelated, and had nothing to do with.

Another thing is who is directing the conversation and how it is done. In the boy example she calls it being “talked to” wheras with the muslim friend she calls it “having discussions”. With the muslim girl, neither one of them is specifically directing the conversation, it is a natural flow with give and take.

Another thing is natural. To her, natural is expanded on when she says its about answering questions and giving info for knowledge. She also references not “trying to convert me” here, within the context of being natural. Again, related to the conversation being directed. I suppose if its being directed by the religious person that’s when they’re ‘triyng to convert’ you.

Another thing is having a relationship in advance. The muslim girl is called a “close friend”, H adds that strong acquaintance would be a good level to start at, but I get the feeling that people feel that the closer the relationship, the more normal it is to talk abt religion. The convo handbook also says to avoid religion as a topic of conversation, assumably for even friends and definitely acquaintences and strangers.

Another thing is context. She says her response to the convo will depend on the context. I’m assuming that the level of awkwardness, leading to their response, is also dependent on context. Being able to get out of the conversation smoothly (like at a table or at the door) is important to the comfort level. Being trapped, like she was at the lunch table, makes it more uncomfortable. (this kind of entrapment is more social than physical.. with friends or acquanitences, we may feel more pressure to stay and listen. At an open table in the UC it is easier to just walk away. Some people are kinder than others and will feel more social pressure about staying to be polite, some people have an easier time brushing others off)

Another thing is the way the conversation is initiated. She mentions “inflammatory comments” as a bad way to start, one that will make her angry or less polite. The other thing is how the convo is carried out. She admits that most of the time it is well-meaning. Well meaning is not the same as unawkward. She expands later on the guy by saying “he was always kind in his approach” when I ask her why it is still awkward even with kindness, she notes the persistence and the fact that he continued even when she was giving social cues that she wasn’t interested.

I think that accepting these social cues is a way of respecting nonbelievers. They always talk about wanting to be respected in their beliefs, one way of exhibiting that respect is by taking their no for a no.

Another thing is the prhasing. The boy started off with “have you accepted Jesus Christ as your lord and savior?” I think it’s a mouthful to use. Understanding it as I do, I  don’t know why you would use the entire phrase on someone. It is unnecessary to phrase it in exactly this way, it is lengthy, and it is most likely not going to be understood. H explains 2 reasons why it might make you uncomfortable (even though I didn’t directly ask her this). The first is that itt makes assumptions about the recipient, assumes that they’ll understand, assumes that they’ll know how to answer, assumes that they want to have this type of conversation. The second reason it might make you uncomfortable is that it “kind of cages you”. That phrase forces you to have a conversation with him. There is not an easy way out. (again, related to the idea of context and social pressure) Being forced to enter the conversation. She adds that that phrsing makes her assume that he’s from a particular branch of Christianity that was extra concerned with “saving souls” or conversion.

Another thing was the idea of not knowing why he kept coming. It’s related to the persisitance thing, and an idea on my part of why persisitance makes people uncomfortable is that we are  uncomfortable when we don’t know what people want. She couldn’t figure out why  he kept trying, and it made the situation uncomfortable. We don’t like when we don’t know what others think about  us or what something’s relation is to us. For H, she didn’t know why this guy saw hope in talking to her, or what connection he (and others) made which made them think that they should try talking to her. (something she and others from the open conversation mentioned, not knowing why they were singled out to get talked to. That makes them feel uncomfortable.)

Other notes:

She sums it up with the quote on page 5 when I ask about other awkward conversations and she says [8:57:21 PM] H: Yes, I think so. Most of the conversations that I've had about religion that I've felt were awkward were all conversations that felt as though they were trying to convert me, and they were almost always conversations that had little or nothing to do with the setting or what was going on in the conversation prior to them offering the topic.

Narrows it down to 3 factors: felt they were trying to convert me (related to being directed and being intentional), were out of context, and broke rules of normal convo by bringing up a random topic.

Interview for Analysis - Blog 21

I broke this into sections to make it a little more readable)

(initial conversation)

[8:00:37 PM] H: Hi Alison!

[8:00:51 PM] A: Hello

[8:01:43 PM] A: I have changed the questions a little bit from the protocol. They're just a guideline anyways.

[8:01:56 PM] H: That's fine!

[8:02:07 PM] H: I figured they were just a guide anyway

[8:02:14 PM] A: Yeah.

[8:02:23 PM] A: Do you have any questions?

[8:02:44 PM] H: No.

[8:03:13 PM] A: Ok. I'm going to put the lead in here.

(warming up)

[8:03:45 PM] A: Lead: The focus of this project is to uncover the things which make conversations about Christianity awkward.

[8:04:29 PM] A: So! Can you tell me a little bit about your background? Just so we have an idea of where you're coming from and all.

[8:04:57 PM] H: Okay. Do you want a general background or just religious background?

[8:05:17 PM] A: I guess a brief general background would be great to start

[8:06:17 PM] H: Okay. My name is H, I'm a twenty-eight year old single, white female.

[8:07:30 PM] A: Ok. What is your family like?

[8:08:44 PM] H: I have a bit of a unique family dynamic: my immediate family consists of a single mother, three younger siblings (two females, one male) and my maternal grandparents.

[8:09:30 PM] A: Oh neat, so your grandparents lived with you (or vice versa)?

[8:10:00 PM] H: I lived with them the first few years of my life, and I currently live with them.

[8:10:30 PM] A: Oh cool. Yeah I lived with my Great Grandma on and off the last couple years, but not before college.

[8:11:02 PM] A: So were your grandparents, or anyone else in your family, in a church?

[8:12:37 PM] H: The rest of my family consider themselves Roman Catholic, but they usually only attend church on special occasions, holidays, things like that

[8:12:50 PM] A: Oh ok.

[8:13:19 PM] A: I think there's a term for that. "Creasters". Christmas/Easter church goers. haha.

[8:13:57 PM] H: Yes, that would be them. :)

[8:15:08 PM] A: So did you have other exposure to church and christians growing up? Friends, or sunday school?

[8:16:53 PM] H: Well, I was brought up Roman Catholic (now I identify as agnostic) so I attended what was called CCD on Tuesdays or Thursday nights. I know the majority of my peers in school also attended these, since we were often in the same classes.

[8:17:12 PM] A: Oh yeah I've heard of that

[8:18:51 PM] H: I believe it would equate to Sunday School. We learned doctrine and often had to go to confession.

[8:19:52 PM] A: Yeah I think it's similar. Both are meant for kids, and I think there's a lot of resources out there for teaching it.

[8:22:05 PM] A: So can you think of any like, memorable conversations or being "talked to" about religion as a kid? Or has that been more common as you've gotten older?

[8:23:37 PM] H: Yeah, it's definitely become more common as I've gotten older. Most of my experiences have been as a late teen/adult.

 (getting going)

[8:24:45 PM] A: Ok. Well that makes sense. So tell me a bit about those experiences. Who are they usually with?H

[8:28:08 PM] H: Sure. The experience that immediately pops into my head was when I was in my first year of undergrad. I was on campus and sitting in the lunch room with a friend and a guy who I had seen around my high school. We were sitting around the table talking about something unrelated when he began talking about his religion to the two of us. It was very jarring because it had nothing to do with what we were talking about at that time.

[8:29:50 PM] A: Yeah that'd be weird

[8:29:57 PM] H: I've also had some discussions about religion with a close friend of mine (she is Muslim) and she often shares some information about her religion with me when the conversation calls for it or I happen to ask.

[8:31:31 PM] A: Oh ok. Yeah those are two pretty different things

[8:32:44 PM] A: With the muslim girl does it seem more natural?

[8:33:58 PM] H: Definitely. Even during our first conversation about her religion, it was about answering questions and giving information for knowledge. I didn't get the impression she was trying to convert me.

[8:34:10 PM] A: yeah, that's really important.

[8:34:24 PM] A: it seems like when we sense there's a campaign involved, we immediately back away

[8:34:30 PM] H: Of course, we also had a relationship, so it definitely took away awkwardness

[8:34:41 PM] H: yeah

[8:34:58 PM] A: yeah that's true too

[8:35:20 PM] A: so do you think there's a level of relationship needed?

[8:35:59 PM] A: something at least more than 'stranger', but what about the levels between 'acquaintance' and 'friend'

[8:36:02 PM] H: I think that's a bit of it, yes

[8:37:00 PM] H: I think strong acquaintance would be a good starting point.

[8:37:45 PM] A: yeah. What effect does it have on you when someone like a stranger starts talking like that? what's your response?

[8:39:40 PM] H: Well, you don't want to be rude, so it depends on the context. If they come right up to me or knocked on my door, I have said "no thank you" or simply taken the literature and moved on. But for situations like what the guy did, where I'm sitting at the table eating and sort of a captive audience, I'll let them speak, but I tend to tune them out.

[8:40:42 PM] A: Yeah. I guess that the social pressure to be polite has a strong effect on what we can and can't do

[8:41:46 PM] H: It also depends on how they approach me. Most of the time it seems well-meaning even if it is forward. If they're making inflammatory comments though, I'm less likely to be polite

[8:41:58 PM] H: But most of my experience are with the former.

[8:42:17 PM] A: Yeah I see what you mean

[8:43:42 PM] A: so with these conversations, are there particular phrases you can remember?

[8:44:18 PM] H: Ah, yeah. The one that immediately comes to mind is "have you accepted Jesus Christ as your lord and savior?"

[8:44:30 PM] H: That's how the guy at the table started

[8:44:36 PM] A: oooooh wow

[8:44:41 PM] H: ahaha, yeah

[8:44:42 PM] A: lol, that's what I was about to ask

[8:44:43 PM] H: awkward

[8:45:08 PM] A: wow, so yeah that's really startling, and weird

[8:45:29 PM] A: what about it makes it weird, do you think?

[8:47:04 PM] A: did you even know what he meant?

[8:47:20 PM] H: Well, to start it makes some assumptions about you, I think. I remembered thinking "is there a specific reason why you would decide to start talking to me about this unprompted?" It also kind of cages you. No matter how you answer, you're being forced to enter the conversation with him

[8:48:13 PM] H: I didn't know what it meant to him. I figured he was part of a branch of Christianty that was very concerned with saving my soul. Perhaps that was presumptious on my part, but that's what I got from it.

[8:48:40 PM] A: right. Yeah it just seems like such a mouthful to use

[8:48:58 PM] H: So, by saving my soul, I mean accepting Jesus as the son of god and savior of mankind.

[8:50:28 PM] H: To kind of expand this experience even though it's sort of off the question, when he saw me on campus at future times he would sometimes try to give me things to read and try to make me promise to read them. They were usually about Jesus

[8:50:47 PM] A: oh man

[8:50:55 PM] A: that must have been weird to have him recognize you

[8:51:06 PM] A: I wonder why he kept going like that

[8:51:55 PM] H: It was less weird and more awkward. He was always kind in his approach, but he just would not let up. And again, I never gave him any information on me, so I couldn't figure out why he kept trying.

[8:52:10 PM] H: Unless I looked skeptical when he was talking, heh

[8:52:30 PM] A: haha yeah there must've been something he keyed in on

[8:52:43 PM] A: so if he was kind, what aspect specifically made it awkward?

[8:52:56 PM] A: just that he kept coming at it?

[8:53:36 PM] H: the persistance and the continual attempt to engage me when it should have been really clear (in a polite way) that I wasn't interested in talking with him about it

[8:54:01 PM] A: yeah

[8:54:17 PM] A: I can see what you mean.

[8:54:40 PM] A: so it wasn't so much in just how he said it, but the whole way he went about it

[8:54:53 PM] H: Yes, exactly

[8:55:16 PM] A: do you think that's true of other awkward religious situations you've been in?

[8:57:21 PM] H: Yes, I think so. Most of the conversations that I've had about religion that I've felt were awkward were all conversations that felt as though they were trying to convert me, and they were almost always conversations that had little or nothing to do with the setting or what was going on in the conversation prior to them offering the topic.

[8:58:36 PM] A: yeah that's a big deal I guess. If it comes up out of nowhere maybe it sends a message that they're talking about it because they have a point in mind, not because they care about you and what you're saying

[8:59:44 PM] H: The language being used also plays a big part, so yes.

[9:00:40 PM] A: Yeah, I am really curious about that part too, if there's certain words and phrases that make people feel awkward

[9:01:55 PM] A: (but we don't need to continue if you don't want. It's getting late, I have lots of material to go off of. But I don't want to cut you off either, if you have anything more you want to say about this. )

[9:02:46 PM] H: I'm fine either way, whenever you feel you have enough and don't want to ask anymore.

[9:03:40 PM] A: Ok. Well just if you have any thoughts on the phrasing thing. Words that you tune in on that let you know its going to be an awkward religious conversation

[9:04:00 PM] H: Sure.

[9:04:13 PM] A: I mean the jesus-as-your-lord-and-savior thing was partly phrasing, I think.

[9:04:18 PM] H: lol, yes

[9:06:03 PM] H: I'm having difficulty coming up with specific words, but I think when the tone and language gets preachy it gets problematic. When I'm being told about my soul, or that I should or need to do something (be it attend a church or read literature)

[9:06:48 PM] A: yeah

[9:07:24 PM] H: Whereas when I'm in a good conversationa bout religion, it's more passive and has ownership. Phrases like "I believe" or "In my religion/church" tend to be said

[9:07:57 PM] A: oh yeah. so there's not a presumption

[9:08:08 PM] H: So I suppose the focus on the subject shifts

[9:08:28 PM] A: right.

(winding down, less important stuff)

[9:09:32 PM] A: I think that's what's different about religious conversations nowadays as opposed to back in the day. maybe before the foundational truths were just out there, and it was just a matter of if you agreed or not

[9:10:16 PM] A: nowadays its not like everyone even believes God exists, or that everyone goes to church and hears the same stuff

[9:11:19 PM] H: Yeah. I aligns a bit with my experience. When I was very young I assumed most people were religious because it didn't seem to get discussed the same way it does now.

[9:12:02 PM] H: Although obviously that was completely untrue, it wasn't as apparent in my community

[9:12:35 PM] A: right

[9:13:15 PM] A: It does vary by location too. I was in Indiana a couple weeks ago, and out there at least most people identify themselves as Christian

[9:13:52 PM] H: Yeah, that makes sense

[9:14:43 PM] A: Well. I'm getting pretty sleepy, so I guess we can end it here. Of course there's so much interesting stuff we could talk about.

[9:15:00 PM] A: Do you have anything else you want to add, 'on the record'?

[9:15:22 PM] H: No, I think that covers the big points. I hope it helps!

[9:15:30 PM] A: Yes definitely!

[9:15:56 PM] A: If you think of anything else, or if any phrases/terms pop in your head later, you could write them down and get them to me later

[9:16:09 PM] H: Will do!

[9:16:29 PM] A: Thank you so much! Sorry that I was a bit slow at this. It's my first time.

[9:16:33 PM] H: Good night!

[9:16:43 PM] A: (I created an awkward conversation about awkward conversations!)

[9:16:44 PM] H: No problem, I understand! I was in no rush

[9:16:48 PM] H: noo, it was great

[9:17:04 PM] A: Alright. Thanks for your help.

[9:17:19 PM] H: You're welcome. Good luck with it! see you at the center

[9:17:27 PM] A: see you later. Good night.