When I was young a conversation was more often than not something my mother had with her neighbour over the garden fence, that is an informal and casual exchange of news, ideas and opinions. A conversationalist was a person who excelled in conversations which was seen as a characteristic of a cultured and well-educated person. A conversation piece was something novel or strikingly intense that stimulated conversation. A subsidiary meaning of the word, conversation, as set out in my Merriam-Webster dictionary refers to an informal discussion of an issue by representatives of governments, institutions or groups. But although the words conversation and discussions could be seen by some as synonyms, the former is deemed by others to be more informal and casual whereas the latter is a deeper more formal structured exchange of ideas.
I have noted in recent years that the word conversation has become a more frequently used word in the modern lexicon. Indeed before I am challenged, this blog Househam on Health could be deemed as a conversation between me and you the reader. A local radio talk channel invites listeners to “join the conversation” related to any topic raised by the host or a random call from a listener. Whether a trivial or weighty matter it appears that the implication is that interactions on such matters become categorised as conversations. So why is the use of this word something that deserves consideration? It seems to me that the frequent use of the word “conversation” has come to imply that engaging in a conversation is in itself a valuable pastime leading to the solution of problems. There also appears to be a view that encouraging communities to engage in conversations will make them less discontent about the many challenges that they face.
I was struck by a recent media report that a community discontent with the appalling state of the road infrastructure in their area had despite various conversations related to the problem with the relevant authorities seen no improvement over a period of years. When approached the authorities seemed offended by the complaint about their inaction indicating that they had engaged in conversations on several occasions on these matters with the communities concerned. This seemed to support my view that the conversation is often seen as an end in itself, that is, faced with a problem we engage in a conversation.
In a society of increasingly oral interactions, conversations, even if they are in the form of voice messages on platforms such as WhatsApp, have become more important. While a certain discipline is required to marshal one’s thoughts in a formal discussion or document leading to a decision, could it be that in a conversation this discipline is lacking? With the advent of the internet, social media and virtual content, the importance of the written and printed word in the everyday lives of people has waned often evidenced by an inability to effectively articulate thoughts and views in a concise manner. In my experience a concisely constructed viewpoint or document was often the basis for a decision that lead to appropriate action. Are we becoming lost in conversations seeing them as an end in itself?
Any number of workshops, imbizo’s, indaba’s and summits characterise modern day South Africa, ripe with conversations about important topics. I have participated in some and found participants and experts willing to talk expansively and express their views but often lacking the practical experience or ability to act on proposals. The result has been a disappointing yield of positive action and results. Presidential Health Summits and Compacts that have come and gone without meaningful improvement in the South African health services exemplify this trend.
I may be accused of being pedantic and out of touch. It is possible that I am entirely wrong in my interpretation. Maybe the many conversations that characterise our lives today are indeed leading to a better world … or possibly they are not? Could this be a topic for another conversation …
