Saying thanks for profound, multiracial, multiethnic, medical care!

 I have no idea what the news headlines on May 2 were; and 11 days later, on the 13^th, I have to acknowledge that I have turned eyes, ears, conversation and all specific thoughts about the state of the world, excepting for Canada, off.

As a news junkie for eight decades, it must be analogous to the ‘withdrawal’ period expressed by those whose previous lives depended on some addictive substance. There is a sense that whatever the political winds, droughts, fires, lies, bombs, braggadocio, and even really hopeful publicly uttered words by prominent and familiar voices, I have remained distant, detached, removed and even willfully self-preservative.

Does that sound self-indulgent? Of course. Do I need to apologize? Even if I did, I refuse. Does that sound insouciant, arrogant, presumptuous and almost disembodied? Most likely. Who cares? Likely no one. So, why does it matter?

The ‘normalcy’ of busy lives, productive lives, concentrated and focused and ambitious lives, while evident in every organization, corporation, and street corner, eclipses the ‘other normalcy’ of lives that seem to be sauntering, stumbling, cowering under bridges, slouched against convenience store walls, and plodding along city streets with the last belongings, rags mostly, of the evidence of their existence, lies burrowed under some canoply in the hold of a supermarket shopping buggy. Do these two ‘normals’ collide? Perhaps, from the perspective of the ‘busy’ and ‘productive’ lives, as they pass by a storm-sewer grate when and where they witness the ‘other normalcy’ just waking from a cold and wet sleep under a rug of some sort.

Sometimes, the two lives intersect at a traffic light when one, carrying a busted cardboard with scrawled letters ‘need food..please help’….or some such prayer. The other might even roll down a driver’s side window, and profer a little change. Sometimes the two ‘normalcies’ meet on a town or city bus, where eyes rarely meet, voices rarely interact, and ‘attention’ that could be paid isn’t.

It is not as if these two ‘normalcies’ exist in exclusion in today’s urban environment. Indeed, there are likely several layers of different stages of ‘normalcy’ some stretching toward the productive and busily organized, others verging on the slide into what metaphorically we might call darkness.

It is the depth and characterization of ‘public consciousness’ about the relationships between the various ‘normalcies’ that interests me here.

All participants in all normalcies are unique individuals; and, there are even times when their respective uniqueness actually matters. When a doctor sticks an ultrasound wand onto the chest of a patient, looking for a dysfunctional heart or lungs, that moment matters, albeit differently, but significantly to both doctor and patient. And the economic, social, political, academic and even religious ‘aspects’ of that individual, are, to the extent possible, irrelevant. If that patient and that doctor were to encounter each other in a mall, for example, even after such a ‘probe’ it is highly unlikely that there were be even a glancing recognition. And, yet at that moment of the ‘probe’ two people, strangers from whatever different backgrounds, are intimately engaged in administering or receiving a specific ‘intervention.’

And for that moment, only the ‘resuts on the screen,’ are the immediate focus of the one, the doctor. The patient might be imagining him or herself miles away, on a sunny beach, while the procedure is conducted.

Social distance, a word I have never heard prior to my forty-fifth year, nevertheless, is more than a matter of etiquette. Of course, we all know that six feet of separation, between individuals engaged in conversation, whether professional or social, is reasonable and expected. And for specific procedural protocols, the distance depends on the purpose of the encounter.

What interests me here is the ‘mental ‘social’ distance’ that we all observe, outside of professional and personal contacts and contexts.

What kinds of things are going on in our heads, about ‘distance’ (physical, emotional, intellectual, professional, personal and the ‘gut-sense’ of comfort)  the moment another comes into our ‘space,’ and we into theirs? Of course, their physical appearance, the angle of their lips, the smile of their eyes, the steadfastness of their glance are all significant, And it is not that their glance penetrates and pushes back, but the degree to which it welcomes, opens, or closes to the other. It has been said that 90% of all communication is physical, not verbal.

If that is the case, how conscious, as ordinary citizens, are we about the ‘body language’ we are emitting, especially when we are totally unconscious of what it even might be? It the body of the ‘oncoming other’ slouched, erect, relaxed, floppy, and does it move in a relaxed, rhythmical gait, or does it take many, small, careful mini-steps of considerable speed and the appearance of certainty. Are these others asking themselves similar questions as they pass us, and do we even think about such questions, especially while in the midst of a somewhat unfamiliar situation?

Do we dare make specific ‘eye contact’? Or, what do the experts on public etiquette advise on whether or not to make eye contact in a public space?

From americanexpress.com, under eye contact with a business associate, international etiquette expert, Jacqueline Whitmore, counsels, ‘When you’re in a business situation, the area that you look at is the triangle that connects the forehead and the eyes….that’s what they call the business gaze. In a social setting according to Whitmore, you are able to look at the entire face. ‘That’s the social gaze’ she says. From the same entry, ‘The reason why we give good eye contact is because it lets the other person know that we’re interested,’ Whitmore says. Try to communicate that interest right away-even before you start speaking….According Sharon Sayler, in her book, What Your Body Says/And How to Master the Message, the appropriate amount of eye contact should be a series of long glances instead of intense stares. To hold appropriate eye contact without staring, the 50/70 rule states that you should maintain eye contact 50% of the time while you are speaking and 70% of the time while you are listening.

The above piece was published in 2013, and no doubt there have been many refinements in this sphere of social interaction in the last decade-plus. What might astound some readers, is that such an even minimal tutorial was neither contemplated, designed nor delivered in my youth. Nor was it a part of the formal education of our generation’s children. However, it is a definite and highly relevant component for contemporary business and professional development.

Talking invariably accompanies ‘eye contact’ and voice tonality, timbre, velocity, and even accent are all significant aspects of one’s ‘voice presentation’ in professional contexts. Imaging millions of teachers trained and deployed in the 60’s, 70’s and possibly even into the 80’s none of whom had the ‘benefits’ of either body language or voice presentation prior to, or even after years, their first day in their classroom. None of these niceties, however, are likely to register or even to be a matter of any concern among those other ‘normalcies’ where people are barely struggling to make it from one day to the next.

In several previous lives, I used to think that the band of vocabulary, geographic visits, musical, film and entertainment exposure, team associations and, of course, libraries one was exposed to and familiar with were all essential for ‘growing up’ even growing up ‘absurd’ as Paul Goodman once wrote.

There is a lot more to a social divide that those resulting from family income differentials. And, although this is going to sound downright ‘elitist,’ we have paid far too little attention to the various elements of experience, exposure, familiarity and comfort levels with different cultures, heritages, peoples, community traditions and ceremonies to which we are each embedded, and from those we are separated from, as well as how we might begin, authentically and respectfully, to bridge such divides.

As the world population, like an ever-moving flock of Canada Geese, on their way north in Spring or south in Fall, continues to roam, some of it based on personal and family aspirations, and yet much of it resulting from forced conditions over which millions of migrants and refugees have no control, the complex issue not only of integration, assimilation and welcoming new people into our personal, organizational, urban, rural and national lives is one for which many of us have been either ill-prepared, or not prepared at all.

Courtesy, kindness, respect, dignity, of course!

But how are such ‘expressions’ conveyed? How are such expectations to be met both by the ‘newcomer’ and by the original population? Are we having a national dialogue about these matters? And if so are such conversations taking place primarily at the level of policy and program, and may or may not integrate themselves into the fabric of our towns and cities?

Most situations boil down, or are reduced to, a bottom line or minimal set of expectations, articulated primarily by those ‘in charge’ and for those people, whether or not they are conscious of this tendency or not, they will place an emphasis and preference on ‘keeping what we already have’ and YOU, the newcomer, are expected to fit in. Some would call this normal, pragmatic, and smooth integration, especially if it is designed to promote and sustain efficiency for the organization. Does the newcomer have an opportunity to participate in its design? Does the newcomer even consider that some of the traditions which are embedded in his consciousness are even more effective integrative and applicable than those being politely, respectfully and even kindly ‘imposed’ in the new homeland? Does the welcoming nation or organization consider the potential for new ideas, not only on such basics as communication, but also on organizational structure, communication strategies and tactics that are imported daily right before our eyes, without our giving a thought to its potential, for our own enhancement?

It is no longer adequate  to say, as we once did in Canada, that we are a multicultural nation, of a kind of mosaic. That presupposes that native Canadians are the ‘grout’ that stabilizes the mosaic, and holds the different tiles in place. As the numbers of immigrants, refugees, and highly skilled and trained professionals climbs exponentially, Canada, like the United States and many other ‘northern nations’ will envelop populations that can and in many cases likely will exceed the numbers and the traditional ratios and proportions that were all based on some form of unconscious ‘superiority’ simply by legacy.

Those of us, in my case, Caucasian, middle class, albeit educated to a significant degree, especially when compared with the opportunities of our parents and grandparents, all have a social, cultural, political, and especially professional opportunity to invigorate, digest, learn and find new ways of being introduced to men and women and children whose background, education, language, social and cultural traditions and personal family expectations are very different from our own.

While some of my generation and background may harbour resentments, fears and anxieties about ‘loss of control’ and the racial and ethnic ratios shift, such a perspective is another easily adopted and yet uneasily recognized form of personal, family, community and even national sabotage. Racism, in the form of social superiority (mostly implicit and silent), is a risk to which we are all subject, like a virus whose identity and whereabouts are silent until they are not. There are not medical interventions for this kind of racial animus (call it a hidden virus to which we are all potentially carriers). There are only private personal reflections, conversations, experiences and adaptations to which we can all become open to entering.

Failing to do so is a peril to which none of us can afford to fail. The riches, bounty and desire to be productive, self-fulfilling and highly integrated men, women and children, like their broad and authentic smiles, enter the nation every day at every airport and sea and rail terminal.

We are blessed and grateful and somewhat chagrined at our collective resistance, in a world  in which we each of us deeply, authentically and uniquely are desperate to contribute to the welfare and well-being of us all.