Small talk and mutual respect

I’m not especially good at small talk. No, that’s not right; I suck at it. It’s not that I find it boring; it’s that I can never think of stuff to say in casual conversation if I don’t know the people. When I was (a lot) younger I was awful at picking up girls in bars because I couldn’t think of anything interesting to say. Or at least I couldn’t think of anything that I thought was clever when said at the top of my lungs (frequently the only way to make myself heard. I guess that gives you some idea of the bars I’d go to try to pick up girls.) I always admired (or at least envied) guys who had that ability, but I truly sucked at it. Still do. (The small talk part. Not the picking up girls part; I haven’t tried to do that for nearly 30 years!)

Now that I’m long past the bar scene (thank heaven) I still find party-chatter to be a challenge. I’d like to say I’ve grown beyond that kind of banality, but I think I’m being charitable to myself; I still feel awkward at dinner parties if I don’t know the people and am trying for casual conversation. And the fact is, if I have the opportunity I much prefer in-depth discussions.

I have a couple of friends I like to get together with when our respective travel schedules allow. It’s always a stimulating conversation; they are both really smart guys and well-read to boot. Doug Gaynor was a pro athlete (QB for the Cincinnati Bengals and others) grew up in the California’s Central Valley, and Todd Parker was from Newport Beach. I met both at work, although both of them have left my company and are now in other companies, but we’ve stayed in touch.

I was in Manhattan over the last few days and it happened that Todd was also there. Not as big of a coincidence as it might sound; Todd now works for a vendor to our industry so he attended the same conference I did. He confirmed that I would be there and suggested dinner. He brought one of his colleagues (Bruce) and I invited Deanna, a good friend of both of ours who also happened to be free. While it would have been nice if Doug could have been there, we still had a very lively and wide-ranging conversation.

I find that one of the main things required for a stimulating conversation (besides having some knowledge of the topic) is a variety of opinions and perspectives. I’m of the opinion that, in business meetings, if there are two people there who always agree on everything, one of them is redundant. I don’t mean that people need to disagree with each other to have a good discussion, but one of my goals is to examine what I believe to be true; even challenge it to see if I’ve really thought it through. I frequently find that I modify (or sometimes even abandon) a belief after these conversations, or at the very least have a greater appreciation for other viewpoints.

Anyhow, dinner on Friday evening was that kind of stimulating conversation. None of us exactly agreed with the other three, but it was a respectful disagreement with lots of nuance. Well, except for the state of our current White House administration; we all thought that was a huge cluster f**k and freak show, but frankly, I’m having some difficulty finding anyone who doesn’t. Even those I know who voted for the Orange Clown with Tiny Hands are less than impressed with what’s going on.

I guess where I’m going with this is the observation that it’s not only possible, but maybe necessary for a stimulating discussion to have respect for one’s co-conversationalists, to be sure that a variety of perspectives and differing positions are represented, and (maybe most importantly), to be open to the possibility of being wrong.

Now all I have to do is find some people whom I can respect that continue to think Trump is doing a great job, and who can help me to understand what they see in him.

Gonna be difficult, I think.