Reconstructing The Socialite

2010-06-15

There is a popular notion that social intelligence is defined by being socially dominant. There is also a notion that the optimal, if not necessary space for socializing is loud, visual, group oriented, and consumption based. In short, we idolize and aspire to the socialite. We need to recognize that playing the part of the socialite has some serious weaknesses, limitations, and drawbacks, and requires certain attitudes, intentions, group dynamics, and skills to get anything positive out of. Moreover, being a socialite is simply not for everyone.

Really, being socially intelligent means being able communicate oneself openly and honestly and also being able to listen to and probe other people. It means not being afraid of moments of silence (why are we so convinced that silence has to be bad or awkward?). Silence can give a space, or break for people to think, or to gather the courage to say something that they have inhibitions about. Being socially intelligent means being able to pursue the people that one is genuinely interested in, and not wasting ones time with anyone else. It mean also being open enough to engage and explore new people and situations without prejudice. It means saying no sometimes, even to friends. It means putting oneself in social situations that are enjoyable and expanding, while avoiding situations that one does not enjoy or that limit growth.

Ironically, honest and truely socially intelligent people are often degradated and called out as lame, antisocial, assholes, weirdos, or otherwise socially incompetent. We chide people, sometimes playfully, sometimes not, for having individual social strategies and preferences.

There are at least two forces that encourage the notion that being socially intelligent means being socially dominant. The first is that I suspect that the vast majority of people, including so called socialites are insecure and don't know how to interact with depth. The dominant socialite has traits that appear to indicate social success but that can simultaneously distract from and avoid substantial social interaction. The second reason is that there has been a great commercialization of social interaction. The propaganda is that one must consume (be it food, alcohol, entertainment, shopping) to be with others. These commercial spaces allow people to be physically close, giving the illusion or interaction, while providing means to avoid, if not to make altogether impossible, the social depth people are so afraid of. For example, many bars, restaurants, and nightclubs are loud and noisy and have no quiet place for people to have conversations. Other places provide an activity that one can turn away into.