On social chit chat

Post Reply New Topic

I was trying to explain to my wife why social chit chat is hard for me. The best explanation was along these lines.

Social chit chat is not even about the subject being talked about. The weather is irrelevant. Johnny's runny nose and what happened on "Dancing With the Stars" are peripheral concerns. What is important is the chit chat itself. The interaction between words, facial expressions, body language, tone of voice and all the other finely tuned elements of social communication exist not to communicate any particular THING but rather to create an environment of comfort and safety. The chit chat serves to relax the participants and reinforce their sense of security and belonging. It is a form of social nourishment - food for the being. The difference between me and an NT is that I CAN'T TASTE THE FOOD. I can learn the recipes, I can cook them up and serve them, but since I can't TASTE it, I can't tell if what I've offered is any good or not. Worse, I get no nourishment from the process. It isn't that I don't like social chit chat. I get NOTHING from it. If the normal banter of social communication is steak and potatoes to an NT, it is unflavored gelatin to me. So even if I practice social chatter, and even if I get good at it, I will never know the feelings of security and belonging that comes from it. It is an empty exercise, one that I must indulge in because if I don't I will not gain any long term benefits that might serve to actually create that security and belonging.

Social chit chat is like force feeding me unflavored jello. I can eat it. It won't hurt me. But it is a useless effort. It is a fulfilling meal to an NT. It leaves me still hungry.

Nicely phrased. That's how I feel about it too.

I've always hated social chit chat because the subjects never interested me. It took me a long time to figure out what you just put into words. Even then, it didn't really hit home until I read an article for a physical anthropology class on primate grooming behaviors that equated social chatter among humans with grooming activities.

I think the lack of taste with social chit chat is more of a consequence than a cause.

I do physically have a problem with chit chat. I painfully find my topic (weather, movie or last football match) then I painfully lay down my sentence: "ho, so cloudy yesterday, we could barley see the sun" and then... nothing else, only silence to magnify the awkwardness.

Aspies can't chit chat. The real reason is our natural efficiency

To make a parallel with the weather incident, I'll just change one single element to observe what occurs in vitro. Instead of the weather, let's take a book. In that case with only one parameter changed, we would observe something close to:

"I read an interesting book about an expedition that goes to Antarctica and everybody dies"

See the difference my aspie friend? It is lame! Because a book has a clear story of facts with twists that we would rely on to articulate more, instead what we do naturally is compact efficiently...
So the technique is to take an idea that holds in a sentence and deconstruct it, add suspense, axis, forcing interactivity in order to slowly dilute it to a captive crowd. Storytelling is the only practical way to upgrade and find rewards by shining in public rather than finding the buffet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storytelling
http://www.google.gr/search?q=storytelling+techniques

Last edited by SuperApsie on 02 Nov 2010, 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I sent this to someone who knows me pretty well and she laughed, twice.
I was with her parents a few weeks ago and I don't say much, I just throw out something funny or interesting here and there and feel satisfied that I participated and go back into my head.
They still like me though. Both her and her mom have worked with autistics and think there's some similarities. Even after seeing a professional I'm still doubtful.

She says I look like I'm being tortured when someone trys to "converse" with me in a normal way.

I used not talk much at all to people in general unless they iniated it and people would sometimes call me crazy or a serial killer (I've never thought any sorts of things like that.)

I've learned to say things to co-workers at times. It has made things a little better. But I'm still not sure I do real conversations with them. Sometimes my face and jaw hurts when my boss makes me converse with him.

I can find being around people draining especially if they are more demanding I talk. I am working on conversational skills now. But, I don't get a whole lot from it because most people would think my thoughts odd, like imaging how to world would look living in the time dinosaurs and or imagining aliens coming and hovering near us and the consquences to our psyche. Weird stuff like that)

Nice said, thanks

I see you have finished your studies on social behavior, so that it has become boring?

Im right there with you! But why are you giving the NTs a fulfilling meal? Sometimes a homemade crunshy shrimphorsemenu tastes better for both parts!

Now, me, I would have found this a great entry to a real conversation. My immediate response was, "Cool. Which expedition?" From there, I would have wanted more details.

The problem with the chit-chat sort of thing is that it very often isn't a real conversation.



Edit: Corrected grammar fart...

It is or it is not. Either you or Wikipedia is wrong.

It is not an important conversation
Yet it is still a real conversation

So because it is not important it is not worth it?
What about considering every conversation important?

Isn't this the point. What is important to an NT is the act of conversation. What is important to an Aspie is the content. Obviously it's not that black and white, but in general NTs will talk simply to be talking. Apsies prefer to talk when there is something concrete being discussed.

Wikipedia is notorious for being either biased or completely wrong, depending on what volunteer(s) wrote the article and their expertise or lack thereof. The links at the bottom of Wikipedia articles can sometimes point to some reasonable places to start research, but Wikipedia itself should not be considered a reliable resource for much of anything.



A conversation communicates information between two individuals. That information might be factual, or it might be about the two individual's opinions or stances on particular issues, or it might be about something that concerns or interests one or the other individual. The general, socially scripted chit-chat type exchange does not do these things.

"Hi."
"Hi, how are you?"
"I'm fine, how are you?"
"Doing good."
"That's nice. Nice weather we're having."
"Sure is."

There's no real communication happening here, since the expected responses are scripted. Usually, I've found, the other person isn't even listening to the answers, just responding automatically during the next pause. Very often, they won't even notice if I give some other answer than they're expecting.



In the case of chit-chat, you bet it's not really worth it. If it were an actual conversation, I might be more inclined to agree with you, but in the case of this sort of thing, forget it. The other day, I got onto a bus and sat next to a lovely older woman who launched right into a conversation with me without the social pre-amble. All we talked about was where each of us was going and what we had planned and about old friends she had visited but lost contact with over the years, and, yes, I did consider that an important conversation, because information was exchanged. The only reason we had the conversation, though, was because she dispensed with the unnecessary prologue, which is where I usually shut down, since it doesn't really communicate anything and doesn't lead any further.

I agree, but NT do perform well in "serious" conversations too, and chit chat might be an important step in a specific goal.

We on the other hand perform poorly in chit chats. We clearly have a weakness here and if we want to overcome this weakness, we need first to give importance to that specific socialization routine rather than valuing its content only.

It is only if we value small talk first, that we will take some measures to improve it.

My analogy about taste does not contradict what you are saying. Clearly you are correct in saying that learning to utilize small talk is important. What I am trying to get across is that even if I learn to make small talk, it does not bring to me any of the immediate social benefits that an NT gains. I feel no closer nor further away from a person by engaging in small talk. I gain something long term because I appear less cold and aloof. But my sense of security and belonging is not enhanced in any palpable way.

I admit that I never thought that chitchat actually fulfills a deeply felt need for the NTs. I thought that they did it for some reason, but never actually stopped to think what it could be - usually dismissed it as their way to kill some time (a waste, I thought, that time presumably could be filled with purpose - work, etc.).
Thanks for all that, wavefreak58, it's finally clear to me, I've been wrong all along.

True, there is no contradiction. We agree on the base anyway. Small talk is almost always dull and insipid, nevertheless I think practicing can be fun, instructive and rewarding on the NT tribe behaviors.

And besides the social belonging stuff, there are other more or less important uses of small talk that you just underlined and that I can think of:
- Simply avoid loneliness or boring time
For instance: at the bus stop
- Evaluate, check, test the person or a common thing (not with intrusive curiosity, sometimes just to have feedback on common things on witch they have already an opinion) This is a major vector for social trends.
For instance: someone wants to check if everybody finds reality TV as stupid as he thinks (or the opposite )
- Engage subtly an innocent conversation with a goal in mind that would be too bold to engage directly.
For instance: you approach a person in a professional meeting and you know you want to work in his company

Wow! Just about a week ago I told my psychologist that to me and other aspies that I know, small talk is like "cotton candy". What I meant by this was that there was no substance to it, it doesn't satisfy. I compared a really good conversation or discussion to an excellently prepared meal that I savor completely at the time.
I like how you describe the difference between NT and Aspie - NT - the act of conversation is important; Aspie - the content is the important part.

Agreed.