II. SEVEN SOCIABLE CONVENTIONS - Thoughtful Appraisal
Thoughtful Appraisal, in contrast to festivity, called for people to think; to be serious and responsible. They might try to demonstrate artistry and imagination; they might use enthusiasm or dramatization to heighten interest. Creativity was needed to maximize insight into the subject being discussed.
Example: Thoughtful Appraisal
(Talk had been about the recent presidential campaign, in which Anne had worked for the losing candidate.)
We also got into a discussion of the type of cabinet he (the losing candidate) would have picked, and the probability that it would have been composed of experts in the various branches, rather than men who have simply proven their business ability.
The convention of thoughtful appraisal has come down to us from the elite salons of Europe, London, and New York. We are told that practitioners of this art knew and kept themselves informed about the topics likely to be discussed at a party. At a public school in England, for instance, students knew that they must read the morning newspaper before coming down to breakfast, so that they could take part in the breakfast conversation. With respect to parties, there would be implicit agreement on the pool of resources appropriate for sociable conversation – resources with which all were familiar.
Conversation of this kind was analyzed by Georg Simmel in his essay on sociability.(4)
He saw sociability as talk for its own sake, a “pure” form of of sociology in which form was freed from all ties with content. He emphasized that personal concerns must be eliminated as factors in sociability, so that all could come to the conversation as equals. Attributes of individuals were present only in shadow-play. Attention was focused outward, away from the persons present and toward matters in the outer world.
The examples that came to our attention were somewhat different. Participants did not share a general culture of sociable resources, of the kind described above. Instead, conversation drew upon the resources of individuals who were present, but generalized these so that they became topics accessible to all. Although attention might appear to be focused on some part of an outer world, interest was heightened for these particular people because of their knowledge that this particular resource had special meaning for one or more of the persons present. In our examination of such conversation, it was crucial to have the help of the observer. An outsider considering only the written record would not be able to identify the personal significance of the various topics.
Individuals brought many potential resources to a party -- experience, knowledge, points of view, sentiments, types of awareness. For these resources to be made available to others, they had to be presented in ways that were interesting; evocative of response from others; responsive to different points of view; and sufficiently separate from the individual so that he or she need not assimilate either criticism or praise. This was a matter of art, but not of disengagement.
Possibly our difference from Simmel reflects the democratization of sociability. Sociability as such emerged in the experience of an upper-class elite. As it became part of the lives of other groups and classes, a more relativistic view came to be appropriate. The convention of salon sociability -- thoughtful appraisal -- remains attractive to those who choose to be bound by it. To others who choose different conventions, the model can appear stilted, irrelevant, and pretentious.
© 2008 Jeanne Watson Eisenstadt. All Rights Reserved
Contact ~ Table of Contents/Site Map
This site designed and maintained by The Dandelion Group™