Why ‘Small Talk’ Has Big Consequences
There are particular contexts that call for “small talk” and they mark critical junctures for developing our social lives
Making small talk is something most people claim to hate, so if most of us dislike it, why is it so common? In the following paragraphs, we’ll discuss the social situations that force people to engage in small talk, which will illuminate the nature of small talk, and then explore just how important of a role it actually plays in our lives. It turns out that small talk has big consequences when it comes to the way our lives unfold.
The Causes of Small Talk
There are two contexts that necessarily bring on small talk: 1) when two strangers engage in conversation, and 2) conversation in group settings. Let us discuss the factors, present in both these situations, that bring about what we call “small talk.”
The first factor is privacy. With every person in our life, we have more or less information we wish to keep private from them. Maybe we don’t tell our best friends about some insecurity or embarrassing childhood mishap that we would discuss with our parents; conversely, we might keep the details of a wild weekend hidden from our parents, while it makes for a great topic of conversation with our friends. It’s hard to imagine, however, that there is anyone that we would consider absolutely nothing off limits to talk about with. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this, or even deceptive or secretive; there’s a lot that isn’t nice to share and that there’s no real reason to. However, if we can rank people by degrees, we could say that maybe with those that we’re closest to we can share 90% of our thoughts and recollections, and that that number would only decrease from there.
If we were to work our way up from the opposite side of the spectrum, we might say that with complete strangers we’re only willing to share 10% of our personal beliefs and experiences; maybe that number goes slightly higher for a work colleague that we’re not particularly friendly with; and it might tick up, as we move through the ranks of neighbor (or other friendly acquaintance), onto friends, best friends, parents, spouses, etc.
Now, another particular to this, is that not only do we hide more information from certain people depending on our relationship with them, but we also hide different information. Thus, if there are different things we might hide from a best friend than from a family member, then when we’re around both of these people, the numbers can only rise. In other words, if we hide a hypothetical 30% of information from our parents and a hypothetical 15% of information from our friend (and there’s no overlap in that information), then we’re now hiding 45% when we’re in the company of both. Of course, it’s a bit silly to try and quantify it in such an exact way, but this is simply to try and give an example for the concept being illustrated.
It’s highly unlikely we’d feel like sharing something with a person, when we’d otherwise be uncomfortable divulging that information to them, just because there are more people around. Accordingly, as we continue to add people, what we’re willing to share can only go down in measure. By this process, people become more private the more people that are around them. This isn’t a surprise for any of us. It’s very obvious why someone might say, “Well, you didn’t have to say that in front of everyone,” or “We’ll talk about it when we get home.” However, if, like me, you’ve wondered why conversation necessarily tends towards small talks in groups, this is one reason why. You can see how this factor also limits the scope of conversation with strangers, as they are the class of people who we keep the most information hidden from, even when a conversation with them might be one-on-one.
The second factor is based on the idiosyncrasies of people’s interests and knowledge base. Using my own life experience as an example, there are people who I love to talk about anime with, and people who I love to talk about rap music with, while others I go to in order to discuss philosophy or the financial markets, etc. If I had all of these people in one room, and were to address them all at once, I wouldn’t be able to talk about any of these subjects. If I start talking about my favorite rappers in front of the people whom I typically discuss philosophy books with, they’d have no idea what I’m talking about. If I start talking about philosophical works in front of my friend that I most often talk about the newest animes with, they’d in turn have no idea what I was going on about. Unless a person is seriously lacking in awareness of what other people will understand or be interested in, or is simply not considerate of talking above their heads, they will keep conversation, in a group setting, more or less in the realm of shared understanding and interest. Thus, this is another limiting factor that can only act as a ceiling and one that only works to restrict the breadth of the conversation with the addition of each new person. Likewise, we can see how strangers, who we know nothing about, bring this factor to bear more than any other class of people. If we have any shared points of interest/understanding with them, we’d be completely unaware of it at the offset.
The third factor is the audience’s sensitivities. It makes sense to cast this as an unknown, though that’s not always the case. If you factor in that people have wildly diverging life experiences and beliefs, then when presented with a group of people or people that you know less about, a considerate person might refrain from verging into any topics that could potentially be offensive or otherwise pique someone’s sensitivities. This natural caution that all sensible people employ is yet another limiter on conversation in group settings, and especially when talking to people we’re unfamiliar with.
The final factor would be emotional idiosyncracies, such as social anxiety, a shy disposition, fearing embarrassment, wanting to belong, etc., which, though not necessarily as rational as the ones listed earlier in the article, are nearly ubiquitously present limiters on conversation and that reach their highest pitch in group settings and when talking to strangers.
To review, it is primarily by the continued narrowing of common ground, by the addition of more people, that conversation in groups tends to grow more shallow with every new person that joins in. Since a stranger is an individual who we know little to nothing about, they represent a person who we have the least desire to share personal information with, the least awareness about in terms of what we might have in common with them, the least awareness of what they might be hurt or offended by, and are the least likely to be comfortable around, emotionally speaking. All of these factors work to limit the range of potential conversation, forcing it to be what we call “small talk.” There is rarely depth to conversation in groups and with strangers for these reasons.
Who Is Likely to be Disadvantaged by Small Talk
Why, if these are the causes of small talk, do certain people have so much trouble with it, while others take to it effortlessly? All of the factors listed in the preceding section deal primarily with finding commonality. An eccentric individual is by nature less likely to reach commonality with ease. Since this type of conversation naturally moves towards what is shared, it simultaneously eschews what is different. Simply by being a bit more unique in one’s interests, manner of expression, worldview, etc., a person can naturally find small talk more challenging.
Moving past a person’s genuine nature, we can say that the ability to engage in small talk, when viewed as a discrete ability, can be characterized as skill in dissembling. Maybe we are not naturally given to operating in this restrictive, common ground, but we can feign it and force ourselves to engage it anyways. This happens frequently, and the inauthentic way people tend to talk in group settings can be grating when you really pay attention to it. It reaches its highest pitch in the politician, making them a great example: Politicians speak with a very large audience in mind (their constituents), and thus tend to say very little that is genuine, and for the most part only play on what they perceive to be the wants of the crowd. However, people who find it difficult to play a part and act like someone they’re not, are more likely to find small talk challenging.
Of course, while we all seem to suffer from such things to some extent, an individual with a natural predisposition to increased shyness or social anxiety will have a significantly harder time than most engaging in small talk. Simply not being adept at communicating in general can serve as another hindrance. For example, there are many brilliant people who have scattered minds and thus tend to communicate in ways that can be difficult to grasp. They rush from idea to idea, seemingly overrun by a torrent of thoughts, and it can be hard to understand them when you’re not familiar with how they communicate. Any individuals affected thusly, or with similarly unusual communication styles, would likely stifle when forced into this social situation as well. Truly, all neurodivergent people are more likely to be candidates for this group.
The Underappreciated Importance of Small Talk
A person’s ability to engage in small talk is crucial because of the contexts it arises within. The two primary situations are, again, when meeting strangers and when talking in groups. Since it represents the way we communicate with strangers, an aversion to small talk is a barrier to forming new connections. If we cannot wade through the superficial and in and of itself pointless small talk in a way that allows the other person to feel we’re someone they’re interested in getting to know better, we’ll never progress to the deeper stages of the relationship. This occurs on first dates, when meeting potential business connections or trying to make sales, and when trying to make new friends.
If small talk were more common at the more developed end of the relationship spectrum — that is, as relationships become more intimate and meaningful — then, whoever failed at it would have difficultly forming deep and enduring relationships. However, it is found right at the beginning of a relationship, so that being bad at small talk keeps people from being able to form relationships at all. Thus, this ability really does form a dividing line in the social world. Something that is itself insignificant acts as the gateway to so much of what is most important in life.
The other place where small talk necessarily occurs is in group settings, and this is an equally important point of connection in the social tapestry. Talking in a group is the same as talking to the group, even if you are a part of it. It is an individual coming before a mass of people. The ability to appeal to the group is a powerful tool for individuals. How well liked one is, how successful they will be in anything that requires social help (which is nearly every career or large undertaking), and how many opportunities they will have to form meaningful relationships are largely dependent on their ability to be well received in a group setting. One can certainly never be a real leader, no matter how competent they might be in that role on the basis of their decision-making abilities, if they cannot appeal to a crowd and convince others to follow them.
There is a lot to admire in the ability to lead and to be well received, but there is a lot to admire in being different as well, and to some extent they are mutually exclusive — though by another measure true leadership requires divergence from groupthink. After all, you are not really leading if you’re simply going along with what the group is already doing. We can review the factors that lead to small talk, and we will find that what they really lead to is conformity. It is being considerate enough to find shared ground — in understanding, in appeal, in appropriateness, etc. However, conformity ultimately translates to a lack of dissent. Thus, we can see how talking in groups can, in a very organic way, become oppressively restrictive in certain settings.
This natural trial of social ability that exists at key points in the interactions between people and groups of people acts to weed out those who are different. Again, it is a style of communicating based on avoiding everything beyond the general and common, and which stands between individuals forming new connections and individuals integrating well into groups. It is a barrier that by its nature works to cull out oddness, rareness, and ultimately individuality by whatever name.
The Importance of Being Different
You show up to the party and are lost at what to say every time someone talks to you. You are awkward and thus interacting with you can be uncomfortable and tedious. This is true out at a gathering with friends. It happens during casual interactions with strangers on the street as well. You go out on a date with someone who you’d really like to know better, but you struggle to show them the real you, and are instead restrained by this barrier of propriety that insists that you hold so much of yourself back in those early stages, and you are at a loss as to what should fill that void, so you stumble through these decisive meetings, nervously laughing and clumsily attempting to make conversation flow. You’re engaged by coworkers in the office, or at a business meeting, or perhaps by customers on the sale’s floor, and once again your mind goes blank. You are not given to the superficial and the general — nor are you skilled at pretending to be given to it. Consequentially, it is challenging and unrewarding for the other person to engage with you, and in the end you are isolated because of a thousand awkward little interactions, wherein the real you could not shine through as society is bound in these instances to exchange trivialities, and at this you are inept.
While it can be hard to not fit in, and so much of what we want in life can be reached by just being able to blend in with the group, it’s important to look at the underlying dynamics that drive us to accept or not accept others, and which personality traits ultimately translate into social skills. No matter how many people are on the other side of the equation, there is nothing in that which makes them inherently better or more right than the individual standing at odds with them. You, rejected by all the world, might be the only oasis of goodness and erudition there is, against the backdrop of an entire population lost in error. There is nothing more admirable than to be in the right and stand by your convictions despite everyone else disagreeing with you, and to be your genuine self and a true individual, no matter how the world may receive you. After all, we are not assessed in the two scenarios discussed throughout this article by how we are as people. To the contrary, small talk is inherently a concealer of individualism. We are only being assessed on how well we can engage in a decidedly casual and shallow exchange of words. Some of the most insufferable people on the planet are best in class at this.
So you’re no good at a party, something as trivial as a family dinner gives you anxiety, the opposite sex is not flocking around you yearning for your attention, you’ll probably never be head of your school’s student government association, and the memory of those five times you awkwardly overshared will haunt you forever, but there is no true assessment of your worth in any of that. Small talk, and these other social games, are ultimately baseless. There is, however, enormous value to be found in being different. What is common is repeated here and there, and it loses its individual worth in its redundancy. One can easily be substituted with another. If you stick out like a sore thumb sometimes, just remember that you must in someway be different. If those others can all fit in the group so well, then some unique characteristic must keep you from it. Hate it or love it, you are a rarity, and there can be no great value to anything that is not first rare.
Enjoy this article? If you have Amazon Prime, you might, for a short time, have access to the digital versions of my books for free. Click here to find out.
