By+Ruth+Graham

Can you believe this weather？ First a major snowstorm， now unseasonable warmth. The election is really a doozy1）. And dont get me started on the Oscars！

Small talk gets a bum rap2） as an enterprise for the shallow， the callow3）， and the dull. “Life is more meaningful than the weather，” the modern high priests of depth tell us. Small talk is for “those who are too simple minded or lack the attention span to engage in more weighty conversations.” Chatting about sports or TV is boring， we are told； to ask basic questions about family or current events risks offending with our nosiness4） or our assumptions.

A few weeks ago， a Boston actuary5） named Tim Boomer wrote an installment6） for the New York Times “Modern Love” column that perfectly captured the current anti–small talk attitude. After a bad breakup， Boomer overhears a couple on a first date chatting about bus routes and the rain. “I wanted no part of this game，” Boomer writes：

Why cant we replace small talk with big talk and ask each other profound questions right from the start？ Replace mindless chatter about commuting times with a conversation about our weightiest beliefs and most potent fears？ Questions that reveal who we are and where we want to go？

Well， hold your horses7） there， Tim！ Theres something awfully presumptuous8） about pressing people to share their “weightiest beliefs and most potent fears” while youre still on the appetizer course. Call me old-fashioned， but I wouldnt want to talk about my most intense past love experience on a first date. Ill share my deepests and darkests when Im good and ready.

Small talk saves us from such forced intimacies. Small talk is not wasted talk. Its a social lubricant9） as essential as wine and laughter that allows strangers to make crucial first connections across demographic10） lines. And its far from meaningless. People are rebelling against it today in a misguided dismissal of social graces that seem old-fashioned， boring， or wasteful. In fact， weve never needed such graces more.

Dismissiveness toward light conversation is nothing new. The New Testament book of 2 Timothy urges readers to avoid “irreverent babble” because it leads to ungodliness； various translations condemn “foolish talk，” “vain babblings，” “pointless discussions，” and “empty speech.”

Post-industrialization， people became less concerned about the moral dimensions of chit-chat. Instead， they began to fear it was conformist and shallow， a poor reflection of ones personal depth. Anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski， who formulated the first academic theory of small talk， belittled what he termed “phatic11）communion”—conversation whose purpose is social， not informational—as “purposeless expressions of preference or aversions， accounts of irrelevant happenings， comments on what is perfectly obvious.”

The latest anxieties over small talk are even smaller in scope. First， theres whether its bad for our health. A small psychology study a few years ago found that people who spent more time in “substantive” conversations were happier than those who wasted their time on lighter fare. But theres other evidence that small talk is salubrious12）， since social interaction seems to decrease stress. As one recent papers subtitle has it， “Minimal social interactions lead to belonging and positive effects.”

Unfortunately， as Boomers “Modern Love” essay illustrates， we are living in a low moment for the art of minimal social interactions. “The criteria by which one chooses what to say shift from ‘whats true； whats most interesting to ‘what lubricates the exchange； what sets people at ease， ” a Vox writer lamented last year. “Its like trying to speak a foreign language.” Small talk feels phony13） to some， in part thanks to its embrace by salesperson types—“My motto is ‘every conversation is an opportunity for success， ” a networking expert chirped14） to Fast Company. To others， in an era of ruthless efficiency， pleasantries15） of the past can come to seem like dead weight. With calendars programmed to five-minute increments， and podcasts filling every interstitial16） moment of silence with wit， shouldnt conversation be economical and nutritious？ Small talk looks like a fussy hors doeuvre17） in the age of Soylent18）.

Then theres the whole genre of exquisitely sensitive listicles， seemingly designed to scare people off from even attempting small talk. With headlines like “87 Things Never to Say to Your Babysitter，” they make it clear that even the lightest and most well-meaning blather19） will be read as problematic by someone. When speaking with a pregnant woman， for example： Dont remark on the babys sex， dont joke， “Youll never sleep again，” dont exclaim “Wow” or ask “When are you due？” and so on. Its hard to escape the conclusion that it would be easier just not to talk with pregnant women at all. Be careful， too， when speaking to mothers （dont ask if theyre going to have more kids）， to cancer patients （dont tell them theyre strong）， and to atheists20） （dont ask them about the origins of the universe）. Theres plenty of common sense here—seriously， dont tell a sick person about a random treatment you read about online！—but the cumulative effect is the conclusion that even the most innocuous chit-chat is a minefield.

Of course small talk has always been a tool to avoid the minefield of unintended boorishness21）. Even those who found small talk uninspiring once recognized its utility， like the British statesman Lord Chesterfield， whos responsible for the first-known use of the phrase. “There is a sort of chit-chat， or small talk， which is the general run of conversation at courts， and in most mixed companies，” Lord Chesterfield wrote to his son in 1751. “It is a sort of middling conversation， neither silly nor edifying22）； but， however， very necessary for you to be master of.”

But I think small talk can be edifying in its silliness， and a pleasure too. Small talk is fun precisely for the reasons Boomer thinks its boring： It requires playing within the lines. Using sports， weather， family， and other unremarkable raw material， the skilled conversationalist spins it into gold—or at least cotton candy. In a way， making small talk is like writing a sonnet. Its the restrictions of the form that make the best examples of it beautiful. Perhaps the reason so many people find it tedious is simply that theyre bad at it.

Chatting about work and education， not to mention trivialities like bus routes and rain， can tell us quite a lot about “who the person really is，” as Boomer puts it. Not because its a snobby23） shorthand for sorting a person by her pedigree24）， but because it lets you evaluate how she talks about her experiences， how she tells the story of herself， and how she approaches trifles like bad weather. Is she whiny？ Wry？ Cheery？ Its all informative， and none of it requires badgering25）anyone to reveal the moment of their most soul-shattering humiliation over cocktails. Ice-breakers like “Tell me about your weightiest belief” ask that your interlocutor dredge26） the depths of her soul on demand； small talk lets self-revelation unspool with a more civilized subtlety.

It also allows people to speak to each other across demographics. Try asking the plumber “What place most inspired you and why？” or “Whats the most in love youve ever felt？” as Tim Boomer asks his dates. Maybe youd get somewhere， which might indicate you and your plumber should explore your friendship on your own time. But more likely， youd form a quicker bond by talking about “small” subjects like the White Sox or the wintry mix27）.

On this count， the networking experts are right： Excelling at small talk will make you popular， and justifiably so. Mastering it makes you a pleasure to be around. Someone who can carry on a conversation with anyone； someone who is sparkling and witty on simple topics； someone who puts everyone at ease—thats the definition of a perfect guest， perfect host， and perfect co-worker.

Big talk， weird talk， deep talk， smart talk—pick your preferred opposite-of-small talk， and theres room for plenty of it in the conversational repertoire28）. When it happens serendipitously29）， its one of lifes great joys， and certainly more memorable than hows-the-weatherisms. But small talk will always be with us， because its the solid ground of shared culture. The more divided a people—culturally， politically， economically—the fewer conversational topics we can share. The more productivity-obsessed， the less time for old-fashioned pleasures. And that means small talk is no small thing at all.

閑聊可不是無用的廢話，掌握閑聊的技巧能讓你成為大家的開心果。能與任何人聊天的人、能在簡單話題上展現(xiàn)閃光智慧的人、能讓大家放松的人——這便是人們對完美客人、完美主人以及完美同事的定義。

這天氣還靠譜么？先是暴風雪，現(xiàn)在又這么熱，搞不清是什么季節(jié)了。這次的選舉真好玩。別讓我聊奧斯卡，開聊我就停不下來了！

閑談被誤認為是膚淺、幼稚、無趣之人的事業(yè)?！吧钜忍鞖庥幸饬x得多?！爆F(xiàn)代提倡深入交談的大祭司們往往會這樣跟我們講?！澳切╊^腦過于簡單或者注意力無法長時間集中于更深入交談的人”才閑聊。我們常被告知，聊體育或是聊電視很無聊。問一些與家庭或是與時事有關的基本問題也有風險，可能因為好打聽或是想當然而得罪人。

幾周前（編注：英文原文發(fā)表于2016年2月25日），波士頓的一名精算師蒂姆·布姆爾為《紐約時報》的“現(xiàn)代愛情”欄目寫了一篇文章，這篇文章準確地反映了當下反對閑聊的態(tài)度。在與女朋友鬧掰分手之后，布姆爾無意中聽到一對初次約會的男女在聊公交路線和下雨天?！拔耶敃r一點都不想聽這種把戲?！辈寄窢枌懙溃?/p>

“為什么我們不能聊點正經(jīng)事兒來代替閑聊呢？為什么不一開始就問彼此一些深刻點的問題呢？為什么圍繞通勤時間瞎聊，而不討論討論我們最重要的信仰和最深的恐懼呢？為什么不聊一些反映我們本質(zhì)以及我們?nèi)松繕说膯栴}呢？”

得了，蒂姆，就此打住吧！開胃菜都沒吃完，就要逼人跟你分享“最重要的信仰和最深的恐懼”，也太冒失了吧。你可以說我是老古板，但我是不會在第一次約會的時候就跟對方聊我過去最熱烈的戀愛經(jīng)歷的。我只會在自己完全準備好的時候才跟人分享我內(nèi)心最深處、最隱秘的部分。

通過閑聊，我們就可以不必搞這種被迫的親密交流。閑聊并不是無用的聊天。它是一種社交潤滑劑，就跟葡萄酒和笑聲一樣，是不可或缺的，能讓陌生人與各色人等建立關鍵的初步聯(lián)系。閑聊絕非毫無意義。今天人們嫌棄它，拒絕這些似乎是老套的、煩人的甚至是浪費表情的社交風度，其實是被誤導了。事實上，我們現(xiàn)在比以往任何時候都更需要這種風度。

輕視閑聊不是什么新鮮事?！缎录s》里面的《提摩太后書》敦促讀者不要“無禮地絮叨”，因為這會導致對神不敬；《圣經(jīng)》的各種譯本都強烈反對“愚蠢的聊天”“無價值的閑談”“無目的的討論”以及“空洞的講話”。

后工業(yè)化時代，人們對閑談道德層面的問題顧慮得要少一些。相反，他們開始擔心閑談俗套，是膚淺的行為，無法反映個人涵養(yǎng)。第一個有關閑談的學術理論由人類學家布羅尼斯拉夫·馬林諾夫斯基提出。他將旨在交際應酬而非信息交流的談話稱為“交際應酬型交談”，并對此類交談評價不高，稱其是在“漫無目的地表達偏好或憎惡，述說不相干的事件，評論顯而易見的事情”。

人們最近對閑談的擔心所涉范圍更小。首先，人們想知道它是否會損害身體健康。幾年前一次小規(guī)模的心理研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，花更多時間進行“實質(zhì)性”交談的人比那些在小事上浪費時間的人更加幸福。但是也有其他證據(jù)顯示閑談有益健康，因為社交活動似乎能夠減壓。正如近期一篇論文的副標題所言：“極簡的社交活動能夠帶來歸屬感，有積極效果?！?/p>

不幸的是，正如布姆爾在“現(xiàn)代愛情”欄目的撰文所講，我們活在極簡社交藝術的低潮時刻?！叭藗冞x擇說話內(nèi)容的標準從‘真實、有趣變成了‘潤滑交流、讓人放松?！毙侣劸W(wǎng)站Vox的一名供稿人去年曾不無惋惜地表示，“這就像在費力地說一門外語?！睂τ行┤藖碚f，閑談讓人感覺不真誠，這部分得歸咎于搞銷售的人會利用閑聊。一名人際關系網(wǎng)絡專家就興高采烈地向《快公司》雜志表示：“我的座右銘是‘每一次的交談都是獲得成功的機會。”對另外一些人來說，在這樣一個只講效率的時代，過去的寒暄似乎都是累贅。時間安排表已經(jīng)以每五分鐘為單位，中間的安靜時刻還要聽聽播客機智的節(jié)目，在這種情況下難道談話不應該簡潔而又有營養(yǎng)嗎？在如今的代餐粉時代，閑談看起來就像是繁瑣的開胃菜。

然后還有人列舉出各種敏感微妙的事情清單，似乎是故意為了讓人們恐懼閑談，哪怕是試試都不行。配上“87件永遠不要跟你保姆說的事情”之類的標題，此類文章明明白白地告訴你，即便是最輕松、最善意的嘮嗑也會被人視為有問題。比如，跟孕婦聊天時，不要談論胎兒的性別，不要開玩笑說“你就再也別想睡個踏實覺了”，不要大聲說“哇”或是問“預產(chǎn)期是什么時候”等等。這很難不讓人得出結(jié)論：壓根就別跟孕婦聊天，事情便簡單得多。跟當媽的（不要問她們是否打算再生）、癌癥病人（不要說他們身體很壯）、無神論者（不要問他們宇宙的起源）交談也要小心了。這里邊有很多的常識要掌握——我不是開玩笑，不要跟病人講你在網(wǎng)上看到的某個偏方！——但是，這也不要，那也不能，累積下來的效果便是得出結(jié)論：即便是最無害的閑聊也是一個雷區(qū)。

當然，閑聊也一直是躲避無意冒失這一雷區(qū)的一種方法。即便是那些認為閑聊沒意思的人也一度承認閑聊的作用，比如英國政治家查斯特菲爾德勛爵——他還是已知的第一個使用“small talk”（閑聊）一詞的人。他曾在1751年給兒子的信中寫道：“有一種拉家常，或者說閑聊，在宮廷里很常見，當形形色色的人員聚集在一起時通常也會這么交談。這是一種普普通通的聊天，既不愚蠢，也無法給人啟迪，但是，你非常有必要掌握這種聊天方式的技巧?！?/p>

但是，我認為閑聊的愚蠢之處也可以是給人啟迪的地方，閑聊還是一種娛樂。閑聊之所以有趣，跟布姆爾認為它無聊是一個道理。閑聊要求談話在一些條條框框內(nèi)進行。談些體育運動、天氣、家庭以及其他普通而簡單的話題，擅長聊天的人能將這種聊天變成金子，或者起碼也能將其變成棉花糖。某種程度上，閑聊就像寫十四行詩，形式上的限制讓詩中的佳作變得很美。或許，之所以這么多人認為它無聊只是因為他們不擅長閑聊而已。

聊聊工作和教育便可以告訴我們很多信息——很多布姆爾稱之為“人的真實面目”的信息，更不用說聊諸如公交路線和雨這些瑣事了。這倒不是因為閑聊能讓你得知姑娘的背景信息，從而勢利地快速將其按照三六九等歸類，而是因為閑聊能讓你對她進行評估，看她怎樣談論她的經(jīng)歷，怎樣跟你講述她自己的故事，以及她怎樣看待諸如壞天氣之類的小事。她是不是愛發(fā)牢騷？性格乖張？還是開朗？閑聊能告訴你很多信息，而且不需要你舉著杯雞尾酒纏著別人告訴你人家最傷心的屈辱經(jīng)歷。諸如“告訴我你最重要的信仰”之類的開場話是要求你的對話伙伴按你的要求去說掏心窩子的話，而閑聊則讓人以一種更加微妙的方式優(yōu)雅地自我展示。

閑聊還能幫助人與各色人等交談。你試試去問一名管道工：“哪個地方最能給你靈感？為什么？”“你曾感受到的最熾熱的愛是什么？”就像蒂姆·布姆爾這樣問他的約會對象一樣?？赡苣銈儠牡妙H有些進展，那可能表明你和這位管道工應該在沒事的時候繼續(xù)發(fā)展你們的友誼。但是，聊聊諸如芝加哥白襪隊或者雨夾雪的天氣之類的“小”話題，你們更有可能很快變得熟絡。

在這方面，人際關系網(wǎng)絡專家是對的：擅長閑聊會讓你受歡迎，并且這是有道理的。掌握閑聊的技巧能讓你成為大家的開心果。能與任何人聊天的人、能在簡單話題上展現(xiàn)閃光智慧的人、能讓大家放松的人——這便是人們對完美客人、完美主人以及完美同事的定義。

高談闊論、奇談怪論、深入交談、機智交談——你可以根據(jù)喜好來選擇這些與閑聊相對的交談方式。就所有聊天技能而言，每種方式都有很大的發(fā)揮空間。偶然得之，它便是生活的一大樂趣，肯定要比“天氣怎么樣”之類的閑聊更加令人難忘。但是，閑聊總是會陪伴著我們，因為閑聊才是文化共享的堅實基礎。一個民族在文化、政治或經(jīng)濟上越分化，其能共享的交談話題就越少。越是迷戀于效率，享受老式快樂的時間就越少。而這便意味著，閑聊可不是什么微不足道的事情。

1. doozy [?du?zi] n. 〈美口〉極好的東西；好玩（或異乎尋常）的東西

2. bum rap：〈美口〉錯誤的指控；不公正的訓斥

3. callow [?k?l??] adj. 稚嫩無經(jīng)驗的

4. nosiness [?n??zin?s] n. 愛打聽，好管閑事

5. actuary [??kt?u?ri] n. （保險）精算師；保險（業(yè)務）計算員

6. installment [?n?st??lm?nt] n. （分期連載的）部分；（連載刊物的）一期

7. hold your horses：停一停；停止胡攪蠻纏

8. presumptuous [pr??z?mpt?u?s] adj. 冒昧的；放肆的

9. lubricant [?lu?br?k?nt] n. 潤滑劑，潤滑油

10. demographic [?dem??ɡr?f?k] adj. 人口的；人口統(tǒng)計的；人口學的

11. phatic [?f?t?k] adj. 交際性的，應酬的

12. salubrious [s??lu?bri?s] adj. 有益健康的

13. phony [?f??ni] adj. 華而不實的；虛偽的

14. chirp [t???（r）p] vi. 嘁嘁喳喳地談話

15. pleasantry [?plez（?）ntri] n. 寒暄；客套

16. interstitial [??nt?（r）?st??（?）l] adj. 空隙的，間隙的

17. hors doeuvre [??（r）?d??（r）v] n. 開胃菜

18. Soylent：一個代餐粉品牌，于2013年開始推出，代餐粉只需沖調(diào)便能吃，用于代替吃飯。

19. blather [?bl???（r）] n. 蠢話，廢話

20. atheist：請參見35頁注釋2。

21. boorishness [?b??r??n?s] n. 粗野，粗魯；笨拙

22. edifying [?ed??fa???] adj. 教導的，啟迪的，起教化作用的

23. snobby [?sn?bi] adj. 勢利的；諂上欺下的

24. pedigree [?ped?ɡri?] n. 出身背景

25. badger [?b?d??（r）] vt. 糾纏；困擾；逗弄

26. dredge [dred?] vt. 發(fā)掘，收集

27. wintry mix：雨雪交加

28. repertoire [?rep?（r）?twɑ?（r）] n. 全部本領

29. serendipitously

[?ser?n?d?p?t?sli] adv. 偶然發(fā)現(xiàn)地；僥幸得到地