A drive by the River

[mdlbear]

Yesterday Colleen and I took a long drive -- our first in several months, given the recent rise in gas prices. The long loop via Highway 9 to the Coast, up Highway 1 past Devil's Slide and through Pacifica, and back on 35 and I-280; about 135 miles and four hours. It was still significantly cheaper than dinner out, and there's a produce stand just south of Half Moon Bay where we got fresh tomatoes and white corn.

It was also our first long drive since I started getting serious about the river posts; the conversation was fascinating, and occasionally intense.

I had just posted Talking long distance; I went over the next few posts in that series, ending with "Crosstalk", about my inability to do anything else but listen or read if there are voices in the background that I can hear. She said, "I wish I'd known that 30 years ago!" Me too.

That led naturally to the fact that she now turns off distractions when I get home, so that we can be together in the living room for a while. Then to broken promises, and her grumpiness over the fact that the River has taken over a lot of the time and creative energy that she feels I should have been using for the CD I'd originally planned to have done by now wasn't even started yet.

I pointed out that I'm a very different person now from the one who made those plans, and that a lot of the time that would have gone into music was now spent with her. I like the trade-off in general, but she thought for a while and told me that the hour between 9pm and 10pm was for me to work on music without her -- recording, and the kind of intense practice and songsmithing that drives her crazy to listen to. A million thanks, Love!

Mornings, before she gets up, are for writing and editing. It's 7:45 now. When did I become a morning person?

We talked about my poor memory for words; the fact that I often ask her to repeat things, and my inability to deliver a simple verbal message without writing it down. I came up with an analogy: "Do you remember all the dialog of a movie the first time you see it?"

"Depends on the movie."

"Well, I never do. After I get out of the theatre I'm lucky to remember a quarter of the scenes and a dozen lines of dialog. To me, life is exactly like a movie that I'm seeing for the first time." (The quotes are as close as I can remember, of course, and not exact -- I have a better memory for the scenes with intense emotion attached, and Colleen had some tears in this one.) I might add that it's a particularly boring movie, for the most part, and the amateur actors keep flubbing their lines.

We had a couple of weepy meltdowns, but even those led to insights and places that need to be explored and worked on. That will be another post sometime; for now I'll just report that Colleen says that they happen when I "snap at" her, when I disagree with her, and when I "don't listen to" her. They also happen when we hit on a topic that's emotionally loaded for her, including unfinished projects.

I realized later that there are three cases that get confused, and get a similar reaction:

1. The case where I understand what she's saying, and genuinely disagree with whatever she said.
2. The case where I understand what she's trying to say, but the words mean something else. This usually happens because she's using technical terms that she doesn't quite understand; in this case it was operating systems and the difference between the OS in her sewing machine and the OS that her embroidery-design software runs under on her PC.
3. The case where I understand what she said, but it wasn't what she meant.

I tend to approach all three of these cases the same way, trying to clarify her words until I understand exactly what she meant, and then (in the latter two cases) trying to get her to understand the difference between what she actually said and what she meant. It's during that dialog that she often melts down, accuses me of snapping and "not listening", and thinks that I'm disagreeing with her and arguing for the sake of arguing. I really don't know what either of us can do about this, but we'll continue to work on it.

The other place where I don't know whether there's anything either of us can do is the fact that I'll often miss the first word or two of a sentence, and ask her to repeat. This is because my attention was elsewhere; either on a task or, in the middle of a conversation, on composing a reply. I don't think she understands the extent to which I find listening, thinking, and talking incompatible; I always have to compose what I'm saying before I can say it. If I don't know exactly where I'm going with a thought, I have to pause in mid-sentence to figure it out. Which is about where we started the discussion, somewhere around the location of the old Dead Cow tannery. Which was being torn down and turned into condos or a strip mall or something.

Comments

[donsimpson.livejournal.com]

I continue to be amazed by how well so much of what you say about yourself describes me.

[kyrielle]

Interesting. I have the last problem you mention, for sure, except I tend to miss half a sentence or more - sometimes the whole thing. Though for me it seldom happens mid-conversation, it can happen if I think the conversation is over and re-tune. Is there a phrasing for asking her to repeat that you can find that will work better for her? I tend to use, "I'm sorry, I heard you but somehow didn't parse it, could you repeat, please?" or variants thereof. (Scott is a programmer, hence the 'parse' reference - probably not what will work for her, but.)

As far as the three confused items...I get upset when someone corrects my terminology, instead of addressing my point, too. In the middle of a discussion of X is not the time to tell me I'm explaining X poorly. If you're really confused, clarifying is good - but coming back to me to try to get me to understand why I'm wrong in my phrasing comes across as dodging the topic I was trying to discuss and doing so by being critical of me. I get upset when people do that to me! What works in that case with me is, after understanding what I actually meant, going on to address that point. If the terminology is a big deal (and in #2, I don't even see that it is, in #3 it sure can be), asking after the original point is dealt with whether it would be helpful to me to understand why what I said caused confusion, and how I could have said it better, works. (But only if "no" or "not now" are acceptable answers to the question, too.)

YMMV, but if any of it's helpful, cool; if not, my apologies for the babble. :)

[mdlbear]

A keyword for missed words sounds like a good idea. At one point I was using "sorry" but she didn't like what sounded to her like repeated, redundant apologies. Then I switched to "excuse me?", which is still pretty good but may need variations for different situations.

The real problem with the confused items is getting to the point where I know whether the situation is most accurately described by 1, 2, or 3. Just asking the questions necessary to disambiguate them can trigger a melt-down if I phrase them wrong or use the wrong tone of voice.

Also in knowing whether the original point has been dealt with. In yesterday's conversation, for example, there was a point where I thought I'd addressed the original point (in one or two sentences) and had moved on to the terminology, while she'd missed that part entirely. We need a whole protocol here, I think; what you suggest sounds like a good start.

[artbeco.livejournal.com]

Your three cases sounds all too familiar; Paul and I have done the same dance over the years and still do. I think we're gradually getting better at listening to each other. But boy can I identify with what you describe here. :)
*hugs*

[callibr8]

Another "Steve waxes philosophical" post, yay! I read this one - as I do nearly all such - with avid interest, identified strongly with portions of it, and hope I can offer useful feedback on other sections of it. Such as:
I always have to compose what I'm saying before I can say it.
I'm very much the same way. First pass happens in my own head, my partner hears maybe second or third pass (at a minimum, sometimes fourth or fifth), and the rest of the world doesn't hear about anything until it's been distilled and clarified.

As for what to do re cases 2 and 3 above? Unless there's something that will *almost certainly* be needed re vocabulary "corrections" going forward, let go of the semantics and focus on the meaning once you *do* comprehend it, you'll save both of you much grief that way.

Yes, saying "it" - whatever "it" may be - right matters. But what matters more is the process of communication, of getting to a stage of shared understanding. At least, that's my opinion. YMMV.

[callibr8]

I posted the first comment without reading kyrielle's. Now that I have, I'd like to second what she said re addressing the point first and the terminology later (if at all).

Protocols are useful, definitely. One keyword I have introduced to the family is nack (programmer-ese for negative acknowledgement). By which they know I mean, "I realize you just said something that I think you wanted me to hear, but I didn't, could you please repeat the transmission?"

I know that Colleen isn't a computer geek, but maybe something like, "packet lost, retry?" would work, and would be precise enough to tell her what you're asking for in that situation, and also brief without being quite as abrupt as "nack".

[mdlbear]

Colleen's been around long enough to remember "Abort/Retry/Ignore"; I might let her try that one on for size.

[mdlbear]

*grin*

I'm not surprised at all about offline composition; your complaints about crosstalk provided the title for a future post in the communication series.

read/listen/think/write/talk -- pick exactly one, and each item in the series trumps all the later ones when grabbing my attention.

The biggest problems come in the interval when I'm still struggling to disambiguate between the three cases.

[mdlbear]

*hugs*

There may be a filk song in there -- or maybe a dance tune...

[chaoswolf]

Sounds very similar to what is currently happening between me & selkit; perhaps I should open Notepad on one of his computers and leave it for him when he wakes up to convey my thoughts. May be easier than me trying to talk to him physically and having my thoughts crash.

[mdlbear]

Seems to describe a lot of people. Not really surprising when you think about fandom and what brought us all together.

[mdlbear]

Email probably works better, if he checks it on a regular basis. Or a postit-note.

[chaoswolf]

He doesn't check it as regularly as I'd like; makes it ritual to mouse over Beastie and Taidan once he gets up. I just opened Notepad on Beastie and typed a 3 or so paragraph letter, which he will see when he deactivates his screen saver.

Fandom considered as a geek-gathering vortex?

[donsimpson.livejournal.com]

I almost wrote "Science Fiction fandom", but I think it's more complex than that. I don't know where the boundaries are, though I have some feel for the dynamics. I think it surprises me because I automatically assume that other people are less geeky than I am, until proven otherwise, though I expect fans to be tolerant and non-standard.

communication problem-solving trials

[05-silvermaple.livejournal.com]

Trob and I have been having problems, also, during the 25 years or so of our marriage. Recently, we have been using a new paradigm for *important* messages that has greatly helped us. Here is a sketch of the process.

It has to do with observing the person who is talking, including listening to what they say and trying to observe how they say it as step one.

Next step is taking time to bounce back the message as we thought we observed and heard it - mirroring, reflecting, repeating in our own words, whatever you want to call this stage - it's the checking for errors stage.

Next is estimating, or guessing, or imagining out loud, what the related feelings, and the needs underlying the feelings, are, and checking *that* layer for accuracy with the person, until they acknowledge that they have been correctly heard and understood.

Last is using a certain, very clear form for Actual Requests. So many of the things we say seem to have been hinted requests, or unspoken requests, or general natter unrelated to a request, or random observations put out just to start a conversation with no request implied. But learning to Make Clear Actual Requests, and learning to be able to hear No or Yes with equanimity to those requests, is a skill nobody ever thought to teach either one of us before. And it doesn't take that much effort to learn.

Nobody reponds well to Demands, either hinted OR overt. Being able to Request, and to freely reply Yes or No, is very satisfying.

We are by no means perfect with this yet. But it is certainly helping.

couples communication

[05-silvermaple.livejournal.com]

NonViolent Communication is a set of skills Trob and I are working through. There's a book, seminars, online stuff. If you want to talk about it, send me a note...

your gawdlessmother Mud aka Morgan aka silvermaple

recognition of Self in Other Fen

[05-silvermaple.livejournal.com]

Mud here (aka Morgan, aka Silvermaple) - hope you are well. Since I looked up Asperger's syndrome, after Trob told me about it, I have been understanding a great deal more about myself, fannish communication (or problems thereof), and geekdom, and their intersections.

I *used* to be able to multitask; listen to the radio, watch tv, read, and write simultaneously, while remembering to check the food on the stove occasionally.

As my circulation-related ADD has advanced, I can no longer do this, and I miss it terribly. I have to ask for people to repeat what they are saying. I can't cook and read at the same time - I'm likely to burn the food, the book, or both - and listening to the radio while I type messes up my typing.

The only UP side to this is that I have much more compassion and patience with singletaskers. Some things, I think, must be experienced to be genuinely understood - like childbirth. -Mud aka Morgan aka silvermaple

Re: couples communication

[mdlbear]

Absolutely! Book and online stuff mostly, I think. I'll get to it in a later post, but I really don't learn well from seminars, lectures, or anything else on the auditory channel.

Come down some Wednesday and we'll talk.

Re: communication problem-solving trials

[mdlbear]

Oh, I like those.

It would be difficult to apply these in the heat of the moment; things like shouting over an interruption and losing tone-of-voice control when startled (see On Snapdragons) happen very quickly and when communication is already breaking down.

When I do finally hear something, mirroring it is a good idea and I sometimes remember to do it. Yes. That will help.

[mdlbear]

Did I mention how happy it makes me that other people are finding my posts interesting and occasionally useful?

Re: recognition of Self in Other Fen

[mdlbear]

Definitely Asperger Syndrome; it's being mitigated by what appear to be age-related hormone changes (i.e. andropause), but I've never been able to multitask, and still can't.

I can, however, feel things more deeply, and think more deeply and objectively about feelings and relationships.

Re: couples communication

[chaoswolf]

It is a set of skills that apparently works very well through Beastie. I left him a note and asked he read it before we showered. Seems to work.

Re: couples communication

[mdlbear]

YAY!! linkie?

Re: couples communication

[chaoswolf]

No link. It's currently not on my computer, but if I manage to get one, I will post it.

[mbumby.livejournal.com]

I'm enjoying your posts immensely -- I'm thinking that a lot of what you're detailing might help in a LOT of relationships...

One thought: I know I'm pretty obsessive about what words mean, and about people not saying stupid things that don't make sense (one of the biggest fights I ever got into with someone was when she was trying to suggest that I calculate pi, believing it to be, what, 22/7? something like that -- and did not understand what I meant when I said pi was irrational -- not even understanding the literal meaning of the word...) -- but I'm trying hard to learn that the purpose of language is communication -- and if the other person says "thingummy" and you KNOW what they meant, it's just not critical that they know that the actual name is the "Push pull negative influx reflex generator", nor whether it was a bank, credit union, holding company, or network that generated that charge. If you know what they meant, THAT'S ENOUGH. One can ask "do you want to know more about this?" but if s/he doesn't -- it is one's job to LET IT GO.

[mdlbear]

Thanks -- I know several people are finding them useful, and they're certainly helping me -- in many ways this is the documentation I wish I'd been able to read decades ago. It's always the last part of the project to get done, isn't it?

I'm starting to learn that, too. I wrote a post a couple of months ago about realizing that I didn't have to make anyone else understand a particular situation; I just had to apologize and then shut up about it. I need to get better at figuring out what the other person is really trying to say, rather than immediately homing on their actual wording and trying to correct it.

One of these days I'll learn...