- cross-posted to:
- collapse@slrpnk.net
- cross-posted to:
- collapse@slrpnk.net
When showing up for others feels hard, some strugglers have lately steeled themselves with a version of this maxim: “Inconvenience is the cost of community.” It’s a reminder, oft-repeated on social media these days, that if you don’t want to be lonely—if you want to have robust relationships—you should occasionally do things that are effortful or even irritating, like cat sitting for a neighbor (or even just conversing with one!). You must give up on always pursuing maximum ease.
The inverse of this adage is also true: Community is, all too often, the cost of convenience.
In the journalist Gabe Bullard’s new book, Against Convenience, he argues that society’s relentless pursuit of faster and more frictionless experiences carries invisible costs, and he pushes back against how unthinkingly people often accept those costs as inevitable. Some of those costs are paid in dollars, as with monthly subscription fees to Netflix rather than the onetime cost of buying a DVD. Some are paid in lowered standards: more easily accessible entertainment that’s of poorer quality (YouTube shorts, anyone?), “smart” products that become obsolete faster than their analog forebears. But in reading the book, I noticed just how many of those costs are social.
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s intriguing to think about the reasons behind increased solitude in today’s society. Do you believe that language barriers play a role in people feeling isolated? Engaging in language learning or exchanges could potentially open up new social avenues and connections for those who feel alone.
There’s a bit of a network problem, unaddressed here. If nobody else wants to be inconvencienced with your friendship, how are you going to find friends? What will happen is you will meet people, like them, then learn you are absolutely incidental to them, just entertainment.
I started going to an open mic at a club, that seems OK so far. Might make it a regular haunt and see what happens. It has a seating area outside the club with firepits where people actually talk, and I’ve been to that venue for concerts, and it’s just expected–go outside, likely share a joint, chitchat with strangers.
But other places I go to aren’t at all like that. There’s an open mic in a large open space with stage, dining room, and bar, and everyone just sits by themselves in their groups and its awful.
The article is about building network and community by accepting inconvenience.
What will happen is you will meet people, like them, then learn you are absolutely incidental to them, just entertainment.
That’s pretty defeatist.
I particularly agree with the points made here:
For one thing, talking with strangers brings a lot of benefits. Research has found that it’s mood boosting, and often more informative than people expect. One study, called “Mistakenly Seeking Solitude,” found that people regularly and incorrectly assume that being alone will make them feel better than interacting with another person.
Avoiding these kinds of interactions is a detriment not only to yourself but also to the society you’re part of. It is often the so-called weak ties in someone’s network—the neighbor down the block you know only casually, the barista you order a latte from once a week—who are the most important in creating a rich sense of community. Because your networks overlap only a little, your weak ties can be a bridge to new connections, or they may know about job openings and social events that you and your close ties wouldn’t have come across on your own. Without weak ties, we wouldn’t have communities, just insular cliques.
It’s only defeatist if it stops you from trying; if the whole point of the article is that everyone is avoiding inconvenience and people don’t have friends because friends are an inconvenience, then the logical conclusion is that it will be a challenge to find someone in the same frame of mind as you, someone willing to tolerate inconvenience for friendship. Fortunately, I think you’re more likely to find people like that out and about than knocking on their doors and interrupting their Friends marathon.
I’ll also add that the benefits of interacting are the same, but the challenges might be different for non-neurotypical people.
