Encounters: The new rules

Why it pays to be nice and not caught kissing fish

Encounters are everywhere. So much so, the dilemma often lies in the when, where and how to disconnect. Being a social scientist and etiquette being my ‘thing’ I like to fall back on the assumption that if you treat other’s as you would be done by, then this is shows ‘good form’ for all elements of social life.

Social life is full of obligations – that email you’re supposed to be replying to right now, that conference call scheduled for tomorrow. Thus, by mediating our encounters to the nth degree this can exhibit an almost neurotic orderliness as commitments are fulfilled and expectations realised. Or not.

But, where is the social structure upon which we can all rely? Presumably, we learn a good deal about the various nuances of how to handle encounters, by experiencing such interactions as they crop up in daily life. Face-to-face the ‘whatever’ that happens through social exchanges is, for the most part, kept in check by knowing both what you and I are doing at the same time. When this is mediated through various technologies, social platforms and ‘geeky’ trails’, other methods recommend themselves, however.

A characteristic of face-to-face encounters is that they occur in the immediate presence of one another. In this instant parties are usually uninterrupted from other social persistence. Increasingly social technologies make possible the same type of exchanges. Take Twitter. Real time. All the time. Here the order pertains because of what is bought to the table – or rather Twitter’s – and, thus, this is accepted as ‘normal’ for the interaction order. This is why you can’t tweet more than 140 characters.

But there are degrees of difference. Not better, nor worse, but certainly different in conventions and in protocols. For example, generationally those of my father’s age (dad you’re still young at heart and in looks – Mr Clooney has nothing on you!) tend to be more conservative. Not socially in terms of the number of friends (although this can be a truism on Facebook) but conservative as in a small ‘c’ for cautious.

This can be frustrating for many those of us who have grown up as the popularised GenX, who are confident with an array of technology gadgets and belong to more than one SNS at one time. Pervasive, yes. But this does not necessarily make us careless. In contrast to others we appear as the go-getters, what my father would observe as the ‘risk-takers’ and ‘makers’. Risk takers, because it is likely that you, like myself, hold people in your network that you may not even have ‘met’ – but share friends, work colleagues etc in common, so they make for a valuable contact. Risk makers as you actively seek choose to live daily life through various broadcast channels; to see ‘what everyone else is up to’; to ‘keep in touch’; and establish and retain your own of social presence.

Ultimately this is about getting used to living a constantly connected, pervasive and (potentially) minutely examined lifestyle. ‘Easy’, or rather second nature for technology enthusiasts. But this represents a lifestyle that is harder to understand and infiltrate for those who are at a distance from such platforms and devices.

What we all share in common, however, is the process of creativity, embracement of change and a sharpening of the resolution of our present experiences – as it occurs in the NOW. Rather than ever being ‘offline’ or ‘unreal’, by allowing the momentum of the flux and flows of social information to rise in a cacophony of noise around us takes us from sheer being into becoming. And by ‘becoming’ I mean becoming more networked and more adept to share constant updates and information with others. In short, ‘geek it good’ and avoid kissing fishes.