Bringing conversation in or into life

I sent a note to people who have expressed interest in Conversare events held in Adelaide, to pose a quandary and request their opinion.

“We are said to be losing the art of conversation. It is dying in a hell’s kitchen of mobile phones, BlackBerrys, iPods, emails, soundbites, chatshows and drinks parties. There it joins other civilities regularly pronounced dead, such as well-mannered teenagers, the tomato and the novel. Nowadays no one converses. People shout and text.”
Simon Jenkins

Not true, in my observation. Conversing happens when the context is right. By this I mean that people engage confidently and respectfully when in places in which anyone is free to join in and in the hands of social artists, people who hold space in which everybody present feels calm, included, ready and willing to participate.

Having experienced this a participant suggested a profound subtitle

                                ‘Bringing conversation to life’

But what about:

                                ‘Bringing conversation into life’

 

 

 Participants at a recent event who were doing one or both
of these. <smile>

 

 Here are synopses of responses from people who expressed a preference for the latter – the majority.

Remembering that responses were requested as a subtitle to Conversare.

For ‘into’

I think “Bringing conversation into life” is more descriptive of your work, but “Bringing conversation to life” may be more appealing to [others]. My opinion, not the truth.

You are working on one of the missing links. Another really critical one is for children to experience conversation when they are young. There is much research showing the children in families who eat dinner together do better in school, have better health, are less likely to get involved with drugs or gangs, more likely to get an education and a better job. I suspect that these same children, no matter how wired they may be, value conversation. Cooking dinner every night and expecting everyone to be there most nights, and reading aloud to children may be the best thing we can do to help the art of conversation survive.
Joelle

I prefer “into”. My rationale is that it has a double meaning and therefore open to interpretation  – which is a great conversation starter!
Moira

I think “bringing conversation into life” is good!
Joan

I like “conversation into life” and wonder about “conversation about life” as an alternative.
Andrew

Conversation into life!!
Gabrielle

I am more drawn to “Bringing conversation into life.”
Suzanne

I like bringing conversation into life.
Lexie

I must say the second line ” Bringing conversation into life” was certainly the one I preferred. I think you are correct that it is the environment and context that fosters exploration and conversation. Creating a space for for curiosity to flourish also brings new learning,  revelations of common interest and new perspectives. Social networking has not died it is just being rewritten, in shorthand one could say. The more we foster listening and the opportunity to have one’s story heard, the more rewarding and genuine I believe, all other forms of communication will become.
Kerryn

 

In my next post I will list the preferences for ‘to life’ and several fascinating and illuminating addition comments.

In the meantime which would you opt for in a context of one or the other being the underlying purpose of enabling anyone to join in respectful engaging with others – including strangers – in public places?

Alan Stewart
Adelaide