Some people want to attack you, but not to be recognized for being hostile. This often happens with journalists, I've noticed.
What you can do is totally ignore their hostility and only respond to what they are actually saying, literally. This renders them powerless if they are not willing to communicate directly.
Also, they like to imply things that might upset you. What you can do is you is either ignore it or call them out on it. For example I read an interview with an old rock musician in Denmark. Many Danes have the idea that it's somehow odious to want to make money, and this journalist personfied that belief. The whole interview was questions based on the assumption that it would be a bad thing if the musician was playing their old hits because it would give him a better income.
The musician handled it pretty well, without getting hostile himself. But he did seem to buy into the unspoken premise. What he could have done was making the journalist state his premise explicitly, like asking: "so what you're saying is that if I make any money on playing the music we made back then, this would be immoral of me?" Or maybe even "so you're saying that making money is a bad thing?" This forces the other guy to either back down or reveal his true face.
I have to admit that this journalist had the game down: he asks the drummer who has had "the least success" since the old band broke up thirty years ago, him or the guitarist. (Those are the two who have not had any hits since.) This is tricky: it's a seemingly factual question, but only designed to piss off the interviewee and make him feel small. It's so covert that it is easy to miss the intention and yet let it trigger anger. The answer the drummer gave was "I don't know, but I think I've been playing more". Which is a good answer that neither invalidates himself or his friend. Another way could have been to laugh loudly and say: "haha, so what you want to do is to make me say either that I'm a failure, or Franz is a failure? Good one mate, very funny."
There was a TV interview many years ago of Leonard Cohen. He had stipulated that he woudn't answer any questions about how to interpret his lyrics, and yet the journalist kept asking questions about just that. What Leonard did was get the journalist to play the thumb game with him, what's it called, where you lock fingers and try to catch the other guy's thumb with your own. This not only totally disarmed the journalist, but also in a subtle way the mock battle of thumbs symbolized what the journalist was trying to do to him. Very nice.
Of course one might say, what if you do get angry?
1: Keep your cool and continue to be friendly. This impresses any listeners and disarms the would-be-opponent.
2: Later, work on letting your anger go. This is a long process, but it's very good for your health in the long run to keep at it. A lot of anger is very bad for your health when you get older.
----
Pascal commented:
In Japan, they have special "shops" where people can come and break lots of porcelain (cheap) items to vent off. Most customers are stressed-up employees. For a small added fee, they can even have the face of their boss printed on the plates, vases, etc. It's not only very popular, but completely accepted by the general public. Considered perfectly normal. :-?
I've gotten very, very good over the years at this "virtual thumb game" of conversation. Thanks to the national fondness of covert verbal aggression.
First and essential step is to immediately spot it, or expect that it may be played on you. I've gotten so good, that I can manage to give "the other" plenty opportunities to save face and gently back off unembarrassed.
It's true, and I forgot to add it to the article: spotting when it happens is half the game.
What a very Japanese thing it is to consider it normal to be eaten up with unexpressable anger.
8 comments:
In Japan, they have special "shops" where people can come and break lots of porcelain (cheap) items to vent off. Most customers are stressed-up employees. For a small added fee, they can even have the face of their boss printed on the plates, vases, etc. It's not only very popular, but completely accepted by the general public. Considered perfectly normal. :-?
I've gotten very, very good over the years at this "virtual thumb game" of conversation. Thanks to the national fondness of covert verbal aggression.
First and essential step is to immediately spot it, or expect that it may be played on you. I've gotten so good, that I can manage to give "the other" plenty opportunities to save face and gently back off unembarrassed.
That is, when I'm in a conciliating mood. In January of 94, some totally hopeless jerk kept calling me "handicapped", and I resented the implicit prejudice far more than the insinuations of "retard". So one day, when he relapsed in presence of an adequate public, I "coaled" him. To use the literal arabic expression. You could translate it by "corked for good". I implied that his hysterical jittering giggles at his own lame jokes were a blatant sign of ongoing auto-erotic homosexuality.
I think he never dared call ANYBODY "handicapped" after that.
OK, I confess, I slightly spoiled all his fun out of the word. :-P
But with "players" who keep at least a shred of decency, I just lead them to understand that the "game" is hopeless, and pointless, and in the end we often end up getting along. The best victories are those where combat was avoided altogether, right?
What a very Japanese thing it is to consider it normal to be eaten up with unexpressable anger.
They'd know I guess. I just watched Letters from Iwo Jima.
I'm glad someone has addressed this issue. I personally have a very hard time with this "game" of (what Eolake calls) covertly hostile people. I think in many situations, a fair description is, that they're being passive-aggressive (though that term often includes a set of behaviors that Eolake isn't actually getting at).
In my family experiences, I get a lot of this covert hostility thing. And in some work situations it comes up, too. And when you "lose" to such an accusation -- for instance (to use the anecdote Eolake first posted) the musician might fail to realize that it was being implied, that playing old but lucrative hits would be "selling out" -- you walk away wondering "what did I do wrong" and "how come I came across that way".
It often comes down to "playing the game" or being able to think quickly on your feet. I personally most value the name-their-game approach (also described by Eolake) which, though it brings the hostility out into the forefront, is easier for me to handle. I'm not quick on my feet in social situations, especially not when there are hidden agendas, so I tend to like to just put all my cards on the table. This has the advantage of not requiring me to be extremely adept at these conversational games. It has the disadvantage of, perhaps, allowing the other person to call me out as unnecessarily hostile (the calling out of which, in itself, is another tactic in their covert-hostility strategy book).
In the long run, of course, you don't want to have to spend a lot of time with people like this. But you might end up having to be in their presence, even for a large portion of your day, in a workplace. Or in Canada. Canada is full of people who use the cultural norm of what they call "irony" to make veiled small sniping attacks. It is always excused as "just making a joke" but the joke is always in earnest. Common Canadian sentence: "Oh, you're going to do [x task] in THAT manner? (said with slight sneer) Well, I GUESS you can do it THAT way, though I've never seen that method actually SUCCEED before. But go ahead and give it a try." Often appended is, "Typical American method, I guess. That would be why I haven't ever seen it before," if the listener is from the USA. The implication is clear: my method would be better, yours is worse, and I'm oh-so-superior for knowing better. The only solution, I found, for dealing with idiots like that, was to move back out of their country and give it up permanently. They can have their sniping little petty debates and just make one another miserable. :P
Sharp contri, Final. (Translation: it has a good point!)
Of course, now you should expect to be passively aggressed by some anonymous reporter any second. ;-)
But you might end up having to be in their presence, even for a large portion of your day, in a workplace. Or in Canada. Canada is full of people who use the cultural norm of what they call "irony" to make veiled small sniping attacks. It is always excused as "just making a joke" but the joke is always in earnest. Common Canadian sentence: "Oh, you're going to do [x task] in THAT manner? (said with slight sneer) Well, I GUESS you can do it THAT way, though I've never seen that method actually SUCCEED before. But go ahead and give it a try."
Sorry, final, but that's just you. Maybe your poor attitude, paranoia and persecution complex bring out that kind of thing in people.
Sharp contri, Final. (Translation: it has a good point!)
I am very disappointed in you, Pascal. I thought you were a bit more perceptive than that. Unless you are just humoring poor final. That must be it.
Naah! I'm humoring YOU by complacently offering a handle for criticism. Happy? ;-)
You're "very disappointed"?
That's beyond sharp now: that's INCISIVE. Poor RAFfie can go collect his unemployment check with you around.
"Maybe your poor attitude, paranoia and persecution complex bring out that kind of thing in people."
Or maybe it's just his hat that draws prejudice from the Canadians against anything which reminds them of a certain Texan simpleton cowboy?...
Or perhaps You-Know-Who preceded him to Canada and expressly told the folks there to be nasty, "that's him over there, the guy who can't take a joke, let'im have it!"
I never did any such thing. Slander is beneath me. And I just hate Canada, it's too cold for my snake Nagini. Naggie will just curl up into a ball and refuse to play with me and the ladies, which as you may imagine is even more infuriating than that Boy Who Refuses To Die.
Post a Comment