Is Silence really Golden? Whoever may have said it first, and, wonder why? For anyone to actually ‘SAY’ that, in itself, is breaching silence. (err…by that I mean, when you speak, you make some noise, however meaningful your sermon may sound, it would be breaching silence anyways)
Silence holds different connotations to different people.
There is Silence by order.
When Shatru saab thundered KHAMOOUUSSHHH, it was the baritone which defined the Boss.
When (mafia) Don Corleone swore his men to secrecy, the oath was one of silence.Omert’a. An Italian mafia’s interpretation to A Code of silence.. Silence promising not to squeal even if caught by either the cops or rival gang members.
Then, there is silence by choice. ‘I like my space so I want to be quiet and be silent’; The Anna Hazare silence. Or, I move into a conditioned and customized space to practice silence. Vipassana silence.
I am pissed off with you so I am not talking to you. Sulking Silence.
But this is not about the silences which are compelled by situations, circumstances or people. Voluntary or otherwise.
This blog is on a different not, altogether.
Is Silence really Golden today? Especially in a world where communication has become such a key? Where Speech has become even more critical. And misunderstandings are like second nature to most situations. When Silence , however inadvertent, can lead to conflicts, bitterness or even assumptions which even time may not promise to heal.
Thus, this blog on the ‘other’ silence. That, not by choice, or design, but, by default.
What if one is preoccupied? Or busy. Or unable to communicate (not deliberately but thanks to a situation which has cropped up all too suddenly). Don’t you have a right to that silence? And how accountable are you to the others, when faced with situations beyond your control at times? Is the word ‘accountable’ appropriate at this juncture?
In the silence by sulk, there is someone to blame. Action, Inaction, or very often, Ego.
But, what when the silence is provoked by nothing.? Who is to blame? The person who is silent for reasons beyond his control? Or the(other) person who is suddenly subject to communicating with a wall when he/she keeps waiting for you to react?
Should one pounce on the other for deliberately withdrawing into silence? Assume that you are being ‘avoided’? And being unfair? And slip into a persecution complex and launch snide attacks against the other? Or should the person who has slipped into a forced silent scenario still try to make the time and make amends? Is expecting even a moment of time from the ‘silent’ one to convey that he/she is busy, a fair expectation, or is it unfair to expect even that? Considering that the situation could be unforeseen. And that it could happen to anyone. Even you.
In a world where communication plays such an important role, is there any room for silence left at all?
Meaningless silence?
Or should every quantum of silence come loaded with a meaning. I quote from an interesting book which I am currently reading…and I write this in context to what I am talking about.
Often, when we are confronted with silence from the other end, especially when silence is not the norm, we (and I quote) “over react, blow things out of proportion, hold on too tightly and focus on the negative aspects of life”.
“We get irritated, annoyed and easily bothered, our (over) reactions not only frustrate us, but actually come in the way of what we are really wanting. We lose sight of the bigger picture (and here please do refer to one of my earlier blogs by the same name, The larger picture). Somewhere, somehow, if we do not realize this in time, there is a possibility we may lose the person for life. Or, the crack is far too deep to fill. Unless, there is the willingness to let go and look at the person in the same light, as we once did before the ‘assumptions’ took over.” (quote ends.)
I have seen many-a-friend(ships) move in different directions when a silence is misconstrued. I have seen many-a -friendships get back from the brink, especially if the situation is handled well.
I am not here to judge who was wrong when the gap widened. But I, for one know, that a stitch in time, always saves nine.
And assumption, is just a step away from destruction.
That brings us back to the point that I began with. If it is likely to cause so many misgivings, misconstrued feelings and conflicts, is silence really golden? Or, more frightening though it may sound, is it the end of the road for Silence?
ends
p.s. I remember a senior cop once explaining the concept of ‘silence’ and said people accused of a crime have a right to silence.
What about the common man. Does he, or doesn’t he have a right to silence? Ironically, the moment he invokes that right, he becomes an accusedJJ
From Wikipedia:
Omertà(Italian pronunciation: [ɔmɛrˈta]) is a popular attitude and code of honour and a common definition is the “code of silence“. It is common in areas of southern Italy, such as Sicily, Apulia, Calabria, and Campania, where criminal organizations defined as Mafia such as the Cosa Nostra, ‘Ndrangheta, Sacra Corona Unita, and Camorra are strong. It also exists to a lesser extent in certain Italian-American neighbourhoods where the Italian-American Mafia has influence and other Italian ethnic enclaves in countries where there is the presence of Italian organized crime (i.e. Germany, Canada, Australia).
Omertà implies “the categorical prohibition of cooperation with state authorities or reliance on its services, even when one has been victim of a crime.’Even if somebody is convicted of a crime he has not committed, he is supposed to serve the sentence without giving the police any information about the real criminal, even if that criminal has nothing to do with the Mafia himself. Within Mafia culture, breaking omertà is punishable by death.
The code was adopted by Sicilians long before the emergence of Cosa Nostra (some observers date it to the 16th century as a way of opposing Spanish rule).It is also deeply rooted in rural Crete, Greece.
ends
