Evening star., 1932-05-04

All conversational do not fall in
the same class by any means.
Just because most human beings
talk every day to other human beings
does not mean that, converSationally
considered. they are alike.
The truth is that men and women
differ here as in most other regards,
some being monologistS, others give
and-take takers, some calm, some ex-
citable
Every one knows the special topic
talker, the man who has one ak to
grind and grindS merrily.
Every one is familiar. too with the
joking talker, usually male. who refuses
to be serious about anything
On the other hand there are many
fine examples Of the serious conversa-
tionalist.
Not always, however, can this fellow
be listed also under the title Of calm
talker" Many a conversationalist is
serious enough for all practical pur-
poses yet is very easily upset.
x X X x
The man or woman-and the list is
almost equally divided here-who In
sists on hogging the conversation, is
very common type.
Usually such a person Is not at all
conscious of his defect, regarded strictly
from the standpoint of the other fell
low.
He finds his own chatter so inter-
esting that he would not deprive the
other of a moment of it!
Therefore he begins the talk, keeps
it alive, and usually ends it, all to his
huge satisfaction, If not that OF the
other fellow
The monologists may be divided into
two main claSsificationS, those who
say something, and those who say
nothing.
The desire to impart information to
an erring world is the dominating trait
of the former. What the members Of
the second class want to do is hear
themselves talk An explosion would
these respective classes ever attempted
to talk to each other AS far as is
known. this anomaly never occurs, for
such people recognize each other in
stinctively and give each other as wide
berth as possible.
x * x
The give-and- talker is the
direct opposite of these gentlemen, and
accordingly must be awarded the high
est honorS which the conversational
world gives.
This is quite different from the ora
torical world. in which men step to the
front of platform, speak their piece,
and arc applauded.
Most often there are judges Of such
contests, men who are good speakers
themselves, and who therefore may be
expected to render a verdict as near
perfect as human beings may achieve
in such matters.
Two conversationalists, met on
corner. or at lunch, usually have no
audience except themselves, and no
other judges.
If each one is to enjoy himself, and
give himself the only award which such
impromptu contests permit, he must
play some vital part in the conver-
sation.
Afterward he wants to be able to
look back upon something good he
said, some point he scored, some con-
tribution he made to the talk.
This sense of having actually been
a contributor to thought, Is the great
reward of sane, normal conversation,
and he who deprives another human
being Of it, as the monologist does. has
deprived him of much.
This brings us to the calm speaker.
Without a certain measure of this
Ingredient, no conversationalist, no
matter how informal his talk-fests, can
merit the full honors OF the glorious
talker, the "give-and-take" man
II he becomes easily irritated he will
want to do all the talking, and when
he does all the talking what is he but
a monologist?