Calling out that people who call out issues “kind of suck” is essential, thank you! It would be really easy to use an essay like this be blunt rather than intentional. And the effort required to correctly name the issue is emphasized in *Crucial Accountability*, which is aimed a bit more at managers, and reinforces your point.
I think I've been one of these "kind of suck" people at times because I was so averse to the suffering-in-silence game. I appreciate the nuance here that while we may be able to accurately see that SOMETHING is off, I'd better not assume I can figure out WHAT it is without open-minded and open-hearted consultation.
It’s not just that they “kind of suck”; it’s actually that the reason they’re so easily able to call things out and the reason they suck to be around is the same thing: the personality trait of Disagreeableness, in Big 5 terms. It gives them an ability to call a spade a spade, but it also makes them a bit arsehole-y.
But this is the mindset I’m glad Cate hedged against. Being disagreeable does not automatically correlate with accuracy or utility. If you focus on the wrong spades (small, irrelevant) or are overconfident (you call a shovel a spade) that’s of no use. Her argument is for cultivating uncomfortable honesty as a skill. People who suck THINK they are doing what she is describing, but people who do what she describes don’t suck.
Oh, I don't disagree. I definitely think it's possible to learn this skill without becoming a disagreeable arsehole oneself (indeed, for many highly agreeable people, this is one of the central challenges of their life). I was just pointing out why they so often correlate in practice.
hahaha. this makes me wonder if there are any movies where everyone skilfully communicates and the drama comes from having to deal with a genuinely difficult external situation, hmm, I suppose most action movies are like this. i'd be interested in films where this happens in the context of pure drama
It feels a lot like “If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it”.
There are situations like some in the text that track well.
There are also the ones where vague and low communication is better.
Yes, I know it’s fighting words to the Western psychology style, but it is true.
Entire cultures — say Japan — live well and prosper because they choose what problems are to be discussed at all.
We have parents and older folks in our life who are not keen to talk things thru at all. The unspoken comfort of low-challenge talk (no politics, no religion, no sex life) can build things.
Movies are modern stories. But we always liked stories, especially improbable ones. Especially nebulous “what if” plots. We like the uncertainty.
Anyway, this is not a strong disagreement, but suggestion that this approach is sometimes too dry, and we have a lot more tools in the box.
I enjoyed this article and like the idea of "movie logic" versus real life. That being said, I felt compelled to comment because I think your recommendation to directly talking about issues is pretty bad advice in the vast majority of instances.
For instance, take this quote: "I’ve been feeling a low-level tension between us, like maybe we’re quietly annoyed at each other but trying to stay polite. Is that just me?" How would you really feel if someone said that to you? If you were quietly annoyed at the person, wouldn't it just make you feel more annoyed? And if you didn't feel annoyed, wouldn't you start to analyze why this person thinks you're annoyed at them and what you're doing wrong?
I would also question how often these conversations are happening to make the initiator (the one who feels the low-level tension) feel better, and by doing so transfer their awkward/bad feeling to the other person.
Some element of direct communication is necessary in romantic relationships and of course at work. But when it comes to friendships, in my experience, this kind of conversation is more likely to end a friendship than not. This kind of behavior just requires a level of maturity and humility (from both sides) that most people really don't have.
Agreed that receiving this type of observation requires emotional intelligence or it could go badly but on the flip side - Why would you be in a friendship that causes you a level tension the whole time? Doesnt it make sense to tactfully raise it, see how they respond and then decide whether you want to remain in the friendship based on that?
This is quite useful assuming both parties are on the same side, or should be, as in a healthy relationship.
However, in a work environment, you also may not trust the other person not to use such directness against you, as by spreading rumors that you are trying to make them look bad or something. This could easily provide information to a potential adversary if you have identified a problem they can blame on you or otherwise shift blame to you for. In a strongly left-leaning organization such as academia or in the arts, if they have more left-coded 'identities' than you, they could accuse you of prejudice against them. (Conversely in a right-leaning organization, the reverse might be the case if you have more marginalized identities, but I have less direct experience with this.)
I love this. I think the movie analogy can be extended a bit, though: very often in those kinds of films, the (unspoken) point of the story is the main character’s transformation into the type of person who can just come out and say what needs to be said.
Which, in turn, you can apply to your own life: whereabouts in that story arc are you right now?
yes i was going to defend Good Will Hunting a little there, if someone outright told him the truth he wouldn't have listened and the film was about breaking down his barriers and anger to a stage he could accept the truth and his past.
"Have you ever noticed just how much of the drama in movies is generated by an unspoken rule that the characters aren’t allowed to communicate well?"
(Just wanted to communicate that to you as well as I could.)
And these:
"Functional people don’t let things linger unspoken — they name what’s facing them out loud.
It sounds like such a simple thing. And yet, so many of us don’t do it."
"Naming the issue means you can interact with it."
Thank you for naming this!
And I love the way you put this, about real life situations:
"To locate the possibility of going deeper, it can be helpful to take the movie metaphor literally — if you were an audience member watching the movie, what would you be screaming at yourself to say"
And this:
"If you feel you can’t name the problem, say that"
This is very funny:
"Yes, we are psychic, but we are also stupid."
Really meaningful, really thoughtful, really fun, really important piece.
I feel like pushing myself to have these tough conversations or even at least acknowledging these moments to myself helped me hone my intuition. I realized a lot of those “hmm something feels off” feelings for me were right and that gave me more confidence to act in the future
This is a really good point - I’m definitely one to default to “hopeful silence” a lot but then I’m losing all these chances to see if what set off my spidey sense was actually accurate in the first place.
This is a really good point - I’m definitely one to default to “hopeful silence” a lot but then I’m losing all these chances to see if what set off my spidey sense was actually accurate in the first place.
100%- I've found this even in conflict with my family and husband. Sometimes, just saying the thing is what's needed to solve the problem rather than waiting for the solution to strike you and then talking about the thing. Thank you for sharing!
I tend to not talk and probably often it is a cop-out.
Still, I now have a situation where I had certain expectations from a friend and she didn't live up to them. I was disappointed and slightly mad (too big a word), but I think it is better not to to talk about it with her. Let me be more clear about the situation: she and I dance tango together and practice almost everyday. During an evening of tango, there are three types of music being played, and one of them, milonga, only two or three times. On the last tango-event we attended together, there were two stretches of milonga and she danced them both with the same guy, but not with me, although we really like dancing milonga together. I felt hurt about that, although I know I don't have a right to any dance with her.
I wonder what's the point of sharing this with her? I want her to dance with whom she wants, not change her behavior to please me, so it would be just to let her know my inner life. Which is important in friendship, but I am afraid it would cause more trouble than do good.
I tried this once, in a professional context. Disaster.
I'd heard from a third party that person X was upset about a mistake I'd made, so I called to apologize and talk about what I could do differently next time. X seemingly did NOT want to admit they were bothered at all, but kept (subtly? maybe I imagined it?) acting like they hated me and (definitely) complaining behind my back.
I really don't know what to do about that kind of situation except "well, try to avoid making mistakes."
I don't think one can simply say "it feels like you still have a problem with me" and still be polite and appropriate, right? is that even a Done Thing?
It's often good to have a potential solution before breaking the movie logic like this. People don't necessarily want the problems highlighted, but if they do, them coming up with the solution is the ideal outcome, but having your own solution even if it's as simple as 'let's talk about it' is a good next step to prepare.
Hmm I've tried this before but I'm not sure it actually helped any relationship. Perhaps with relationships where there was a single hiccup that was unresolved as in the dynamic you had with that other girl in law school.
But with friends, I tend to find people express non-verbally in our relationship what they might say out loud if asked in private in my absence. Bringing up the tension explicitly has rarely helped me resolve the tension.
If you asked me 2 years ago whether doing this was a good idea, I would've said the same - no matter how much tact i learnt many folks were apathetic or responded negatively. Since then I have however managed to build a supportive friend circle and what most of them have in common is that they get curious when we bring things like this up - it's now become an unintentional litmus test for feeling out whether someone would make a close friend, versus just someone i like hanging out on occasion.
Probably neutral on net. I do think in most cases it made the other party more aware of my frustrations, which may have pushed them to meet me halfway towards a resolution. But it also labeled me as emotionally needy (feedback I've heard from a few folks).
Calling out that people who call out issues “kind of suck” is essential, thank you! It would be really easy to use an essay like this be blunt rather than intentional. And the effort required to correctly name the issue is emphasized in *Crucial Accountability*, which is aimed a bit more at managers, and reinforces your point.
I think I've been one of these "kind of suck" people at times because I was so averse to the suffering-in-silence game. I appreciate the nuance here that while we may be able to accurately see that SOMETHING is off, I'd better not assume I can figure out WHAT it is without open-minded and open-hearted consultation.
It’s not just that they “kind of suck”; it’s actually that the reason they’re so easily able to call things out and the reason they suck to be around is the same thing: the personality trait of Disagreeableness, in Big 5 terms. It gives them an ability to call a spade a spade, but it also makes them a bit arsehole-y.
But this is the mindset I’m glad Cate hedged against. Being disagreeable does not automatically correlate with accuracy or utility. If you focus on the wrong spades (small, irrelevant) or are overconfident (you call a shovel a spade) that’s of no use. Her argument is for cultivating uncomfortable honesty as a skill. People who suck THINK they are doing what she is describing, but people who do what she describes don’t suck.
Oh, I don't disagree. I definitely think it's possible to learn this skill without becoming a disagreeable arsehole oneself (indeed, for many highly agreeable people, this is one of the central challenges of their life). I was just pointing out why they so often correlate in practice.
This is also bad writing in movies, IMO!
I'm with you!
hahaha. this makes me wonder if there are any movies where everyone skilfully communicates and the drama comes from having to deal with a genuinely difficult external situation, hmm, I suppose most action movies are like this. i'd be interested in films where this happens in the context of pure drama
Twelve Angry Men?
This is a valid but narrow approach.
It feels a lot like “If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it”.
There are situations like some in the text that track well.
There are also the ones where vague and low communication is better.
Yes, I know it’s fighting words to the Western psychology style, but it is true.
Entire cultures — say Japan — live well and prosper because they choose what problems are to be discussed at all.
We have parents and older folks in our life who are not keen to talk things thru at all. The unspoken comfort of low-challenge talk (no politics, no religion, no sex life) can build things.
Movies are modern stories. But we always liked stories, especially improbable ones. Especially nebulous “what if” plots. We like the uncertainty.
Anyway, this is not a strong disagreement, but suggestion that this approach is sometimes too dry, and we have a lot more tools in the box.
Thanks for writing this.
There's a lot here that I agree with and I really feel what you're writing.
Being open and communicating seems to be the right approach in close relationships.
But I have reservations about the effect of talk or dialogue on deeper issues.
I used to think that lack of dialogue is the root cause of so many problems. I've begun to see differently.
Truth is felt deeper in the bones.
I enjoyed this article and like the idea of "movie logic" versus real life. That being said, I felt compelled to comment because I think your recommendation to directly talking about issues is pretty bad advice in the vast majority of instances.
For instance, take this quote: "I’ve been feeling a low-level tension between us, like maybe we’re quietly annoyed at each other but trying to stay polite. Is that just me?" How would you really feel if someone said that to you? If you were quietly annoyed at the person, wouldn't it just make you feel more annoyed? And if you didn't feel annoyed, wouldn't you start to analyze why this person thinks you're annoyed at them and what you're doing wrong?
I would also question how often these conversations are happening to make the initiator (the one who feels the low-level tension) feel better, and by doing so transfer their awkward/bad feeling to the other person.
Some element of direct communication is necessary in romantic relationships and of course at work. But when it comes to friendships, in my experience, this kind of conversation is more likely to end a friendship than not. This kind of behavior just requires a level of maturity and humility (from both sides) that most people really don't have.
Agreed that receiving this type of observation requires emotional intelligence or it could go badly but on the flip side - Why would you be in a friendship that causes you a level tension the whole time? Doesnt it make sense to tactfully raise it, see how they respond and then decide whether you want to remain in the friendship based on that?
This substack is a textbook of super fruit lifehacks.
Excited for the book to come out!
thank you Sam!
This is quite useful assuming both parties are on the same side, or should be, as in a healthy relationship.
However, in a work environment, you also may not trust the other person not to use such directness against you, as by spreading rumors that you are trying to make them look bad or something. This could easily provide information to a potential adversary if you have identified a problem they can blame on you or otherwise shift blame to you for. In a strongly left-leaning organization such as academia or in the arts, if they have more left-coded 'identities' than you, they could accuse you of prejudice against them. (Conversely in a right-leaning organization, the reverse might be the case if you have more marginalized identities, but I have less direct experience with this.)
I love this. I think the movie analogy can be extended a bit, though: very often in those kinds of films, the (unspoken) point of the story is the main character’s transformation into the type of person who can just come out and say what needs to be said.
Which, in turn, you can apply to your own life: whereabouts in that story arc are you right now?
yes i was going to defend Good Will Hunting a little there, if someone outright told him the truth he wouldn't have listened and the film was about breaking down his barriers and anger to a stage he could accept the truth and his past.
Dear Cate,
Excellent piece!
Love this opening line so much:
"Have you ever noticed just how much of the drama in movies is generated by an unspoken rule that the characters aren’t allowed to communicate well?"
(Just wanted to communicate that to you as well as I could.)
And these:
"Functional people don’t let things linger unspoken — they name what’s facing them out loud.
It sounds like such a simple thing. And yet, so many of us don’t do it."
"Naming the issue means you can interact with it."
Thank you for naming this!
And I love the way you put this, about real life situations:
"To locate the possibility of going deeper, it can be helpful to take the movie metaphor literally — if you were an audience member watching the movie, what would you be screaming at yourself to say"
And this:
"If you feel you can’t name the problem, say that"
This is very funny:
"Yes, we are psychic, but we are also stupid."
Really meaningful, really thoughtful, really fun, really important piece.
Thank you for sharing!
Love
Myq
I feel like pushing myself to have these tough conversations or even at least acknowledging these moments to myself helped me hone my intuition. I realized a lot of those “hmm something feels off” feelings for me were right and that gave me more confidence to act in the future
This is a really good point - I’m definitely one to default to “hopeful silence” a lot but then I’m losing all these chances to see if what set off my spidey sense was actually accurate in the first place.
This is a really good point - I’m definitely one to default to “hopeful silence” a lot but then I’m losing all these chances to see if what set off my spidey sense was actually accurate in the first place.
100%- I've found this even in conflict with my family and husband. Sometimes, just saying the thing is what's needed to solve the problem rather than waiting for the solution to strike you and then talking about the thing. Thank you for sharing!
When to talk and when not to?
I tend to not talk and probably often it is a cop-out.
Still, I now have a situation where I had certain expectations from a friend and she didn't live up to them. I was disappointed and slightly mad (too big a word), but I think it is better not to to talk about it with her. Let me be more clear about the situation: she and I dance tango together and practice almost everyday. During an evening of tango, there are three types of music being played, and one of them, milonga, only two or three times. On the last tango-event we attended together, there were two stretches of milonga and she danced them both with the same guy, but not with me, although we really like dancing milonga together. I felt hurt about that, although I know I don't have a right to any dance with her.
I wonder what's the point of sharing this with her? I want her to dance with whom she wants, not change her behavior to please me, so it would be just to let her know my inner life. Which is important in friendship, but I am afraid it would cause more trouble than do good.
Any thoughts?
what would be the trouble with saying simply "I missed dancing milonga with you last time," and seeing how she reacts?
I tried this once, in a professional context. Disaster.
I'd heard from a third party that person X was upset about a mistake I'd made, so I called to apologize and talk about what I could do differently next time. X seemingly did NOT want to admit they were bothered at all, but kept (subtly? maybe I imagined it?) acting like they hated me and (definitely) complaining behind my back.
I really don't know what to do about that kind of situation except "well, try to avoid making mistakes."
I don't think one can simply say "it feels like you still have a problem with me" and still be polite and appropriate, right? is that even a Done Thing?
This is so super helpful. Why do we humans have to make things so complicated?
It's often good to have a potential solution before breaking the movie logic like this. People don't necessarily want the problems highlighted, but if they do, them coming up with the solution is the ideal outcome, but having your own solution even if it's as simple as 'let's talk about it' is a good next step to prepare.
Hmm I've tried this before but I'm not sure it actually helped any relationship. Perhaps with relationships where there was a single hiccup that was unresolved as in the dynamic you had with that other girl in law school.
But with friends, I tend to find people express non-verbally in our relationship what they might say out loud if asked in private in my absence. Bringing up the tension explicitly has rarely helped me resolve the tension.
If you asked me 2 years ago whether doing this was a good idea, I would've said the same - no matter how much tact i learnt many folks were apathetic or responded negatively. Since then I have however managed to build a supportive friend circle and what most of them have in common is that they get curious when we bring things like this up - it's now become an unintentional litmus test for feeling out whether someone would make a close friend, versus just someone i like hanging out on occasion.
oh, interesting! that's very different from my experience.
Have you found it to have a negative effect, or just not really make an impact one way or the other?
Probably neutral on net. I do think in most cases it made the other party more aware of my frustrations, which may have pushed them to meet me halfway towards a resolution. But it also labeled me as emotionally needy (feedback I've heard from a few folks).