Work on Draft Analysis - blog 26

H highlighted relationship and the flow of conversation as two features that could make a conversation really awkward (see first dialogue bit) or natural. I see both of these things as fitting under the greater heading of Context, or role-playing, as Cline calls it. Without the correct relationship in place, a conversation about religion will easily feel out of place. This is a sensitive topic and not frequently does it come up among mere acquaintences (in fact, the conversation etiquette guides state explicitly to avoid it). So when this topic comes up with mere strangers it is, in a sense, out of an appropriate context. The acquaintance is stepping outside of the bounds of their “role” of acquaintance. With a friendship, however, the relationship itself – built over time by shared experiences and communication, creates the backdrop for a comfortable conversation. People who are friends, or “close friends” as H calls it, usually want to share deeper information about themselves or learn that of each other. For a stranger to go into these waters is to step onto forbidden ground, or to break the sanctitiy of that person’s inner world.

H adds to the idea of context through the following section of the interview:

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

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.

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

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

How the conversation is initiated, as well as how it is carried out in general, became a central factor that H referenced throughout the interview. She builds on this concept later on when we are talking about social pressures and politeness. She says that how they approach her will have an affect on how she is able to respond. She identifies “well-meaning yet forward” as sort of the good approach while “inflammatory comments” is the wrong way.

This section of the interview adds even more ideas to what may cause a religious conversation to feel awkward. H builds on the idea of initiation in her latter statement, saying that how they approach her will have an affect on how she is able to respond. She identifies “well-meaning yet forward” as sort of the good approach while “inflammatory comments” is the wrong way.

Phrasing

When I asked H about particular memorable phrases from these religious conversations, her answer was again immediate and came directly from the first example of the guy from her high school.

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

After laughing about the awkwardness of this together, I asked H for more clarification on what made this awkward.

A: what about it makes it weird, do you think?

A: did you even know what he meant?

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

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.

You can see again here that the issue of initiation is very important to H. Even though we are talking about phrasing, she mentions that her first thought was of how he had started on this topic “unprompted”. H is able to shed some light on why phrasing makes people feel awkward when she states that it “cages you”, she felt forced to enter the conversation with him. This is an interesting point that I was glad to hear about. People don’t like feeling like they don’t know how to get out of a situation smoothly. In a “good” social situation, we would be able to ease in and out of topics smoothly, depending on the person’s comfort level. I had never thought of phrasing as being something that would trap people, but it certainly makes sense that how you put the question will limit how the person can answer. With conversations of a sensitive subject like religion, we should try to state things in a more open way that would allow them to get out if they wanted. Trapping them verbally does not win any fans, it makes enemies.

We continued discussing phrasing later on, and H was able to give more reasons for why it made her feel awkward.

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)

A: yeah

H: Whereas when I'm in a good conversation about religion, it's more passive and has ownership. Phrases like "I believe" or "In my religion/church" tend to be said

A: oh yeah. so there's not a presumption

H: So I suppose the focus on the subject shifts

A: right.

H seems to like specifying that the religion belongs to the other person. In the first bit of dialogue referenced, she clarifies that the guy started talking about “his” religion and that even with her friend it is talking about “her” religion. So here, when she emphasizes ownership, it is understandable that she prefers qualifying statements like the ones she mentions. Something we can note about this is when she says that the focus of the subject shifts, it is intended grammatically as well as in a deeper sense. I get the feeling with religious conversations that because it is a sensitive topic, people are very wary of others making judgements on the state of their souls. So in a geneal religious conversation, the initiator should be conscious of how they phrase things so as not to induce guilt or an overly strong focus on the other person.