Letters to the Editor
-
Interesting...
I agree with previous letter writers that the author's tone was off-putting. Her attempt to be cute turned pedantic and cloying. I won't go into the details, because ya'll have said it very well already.
But I'm trying to read between the lines and understand her real point. It's true that there is a clear difference between hurtful and damaging gossip vs. the valuable, kind and community-connecting discussion of other people and their lives. But there's a huge gray area in between that can be very difficult to navigate. It's easy to get lost in that gray area and hurt people accidentally. This is especially difficult in situations like parties or animated discussions where the ideas and stories are just flowing, and the next thing you know you've said what might be the wrong thing.
Her example of the friend who had the NetFlix issue? That friend might have been mightily embarrassed to have her carelessness discussed so publicly. Even without her name attached, another person in the crowd might have figured out who she was. You never really know when a piece of information would be seen as gossip by the person concerned. Does that mean she should never share that story? It was a valuable story in that context. But in another context the exact same story would have been gossip and not worth the risk of hurting the friend. Understanding that gray area and treading carefully behooves us all.
Clearly, you can't avoid ever talking about other people. But the author's effort was an interesting and valuable exercise. She sought to give conscious thought to every word she spoke and learn to differentiate the valuable from the gossip - both as a whole, and within the context of a given conversation. By biting her tongue for so long, I would guess she got a good feeling for when such discourse is valuable and meaningful and when it is merely gossipful. A few rounds of, "I *really* should have told that story about Jane and Bob, it would have contributed so much," vs. "Boy, I'm glad I didn't tell that story about Jill and her dog. It was right on the tip of my tongue but it really wouldn't have contributed anything," would help her develop the skill to make those differentiations on the fly in the future.
-
Confused about the writer's definition
First, she describes gossip as any discussion of other people when they're not there, and uses as the example talking with her fiance about how much money her parents can contribute to the wedding. Elsewhere in the article she talks about gossip as "catty," and thus seems to be defining it the way most of us do, giving away something meant to be kept private, often with a certain nasty relish. So which is it?
I maintain that the important thing to understand, REALLY understand, is that people have the right to decide who knows what about them. We should have the privilege of trusting the people we choose. Can we all agree on that? Those that argue that there's NO OTHER WAY TO GET THE REST OF THE STORY are forgetting some other important things: one, they don't have the right to the story. If you really care, earn that person's trust yourself. Two, we're not talking about "information" in some abstract sense. We're talking about people's lives. Very often, the fact that something is being talked about can, in itself, effect the outcome of whatever conflict is going on, or create conflict where none exists yet, and being a part of that is really a bad thing to do to someone.
Ultimately, I think any so-called closeness resulting from it is an illusion - come on, you're talking about someone ELSE, not being vulnerable yourself. The thing is, close trusting relationships are extremely important to me, and what's required to maintain those is trust. They need to know that what they tell me stays with me, and I'm certainly not going to open up to anyone I've heard gossiping about someone else. Closeness, community is not carrying around information about people - it's the feeling created between you that comes from true intimacy and trust. Gossip works directly against that.
Cattiness is boring.
-
Is it really any better
to spend your time typing hateful things into a computer that you know the writer is going to read? At least Ms. Silag is trying to be honest with herself.
-
She was paid, name withheld
And one assumes that she understood that this website invites readers' letters. So she sort of has to take it.
She might, should she choose to do so, answer their criticisms. I assume, though, that this essay-like thing was designed to get clicks and outraged "debate," not to create a real conversation among the writer and her readers.
-
Pssst.....did you know?
Do you know who watches entirely too much “70’s” TV and has an unnaturally deep knowledge of the Brady Bunch? Ewwww!
Seriously though, the analogy of gossip as an addiction is a good one. The subject could be gossip, smoking, alcohol, video games, soap operas, or insert your choice here . Gossip, like alcohol and smoking has the ability to hurt others as well as ourselves. But the author took an important first step in recognizing the pitfalls of her pastime and at least attempting to correct it.
I quit smoking every day for 15 years, all the while deluding myself that "I was just a social smoker," hiding the habit from family and friends (my live in partner didn't know I smoked), and borrowing smokes--not because I was cheap, but because I was in total denial. In short, I hated myself for all these activities.
I experience the same feelings with gossip and …well… certain reality shows. (please don’t tell anyone okay)
In my experience, gossip is seductive. Soooo seductive. On my own, I'm okay. My friends and family and I don't indulge in harmful or frivolous gossip, not because we are holier than though, it’s just the way we are. (Or maybe I’d just rather talk about me?) But when I am faced with a true gossip and a juicy topic, I can quickly get sucked into the muck and mire. Worse, in very short order, I can actually become far worse than the one who seduced me. I’ve witnessed this in myself, and it sickens me. Fortunately, the harm inflicted has been greater to me than to others. I have suffered at least one career set back and much self admonishment.
A few years ago I ended a friendship that was entirely based on gossip. Lifesucking, time wasting, useless gossip. Our falling out was not because of gossip but over a simple misunderstanding. Without getting into the details, I quietly stepped out of the friendship over the misunderstanding, and then I realized that I had freed up countless hours in my week that were previously wasted recounting the exploits of others. My friend tried to reconnect, not because she missed my friendship, but because she is completely addicted. I realized that it didn’t matter who was on the end of the line dishing with her, just that the line was engaged. I am not going there again.
Like smoking, I find that it is best to avoid associating with people who engage in the behaviour I want to change…at least until I can conquer it on my own. I’m smoke free for 9 years, and I no longer need to avoid smokers. But more interesting is the fact that the smokers have dropped out of my life. It is the same with gossips. They don’t want to be with anyone who doesn’t engage in the same bad habit.
But enough about me... isn't it interesting that some of the letter writers seem to vociferously elevate themselves above the author in a way that seems entirely unhealthy and self-righteous? “Me thinks the lady doth protest too much” perhaps?