Who hasn’t spoken too forthrightly about someone or something? It’s an enterprise able or likely to cause harm or bad consequences.  The danger lies not only in its directness but its immediacy, the one being without deflection, the other being too urgent. Very often the result of such straightforward honesty is remorse, either because one spoke too bluntly or mistakenly. Being outspoken may also offend one’s view of oneself; that is, one may prefer to “speak with music in your voice” as opposed to speaking more brashly. This particular bent may arise from cultural discipline; or, it may be the consequence of a dissuading psychological conviction that “we see in others what we see in ourselves”.

The curious feature of social sublimation is that it rarely disguises the percolating intent. Whether spoken outrightly or through the eyes “as windows of the soul”, it is impossible to hide the true design. Even if one were to preserve a reluctance to engage in such frankness there nonetheless persists the complication arising from its source. If for example one positively dislikes someone, the estrangement is not only palpable but also inescapable.  Identifying exactness in matters of love and friendship is ultimately not without its merit.  How one performs the detraction is as well worthy of consideration; one should not abandon the determination for fear only of vocalizing it.

There is a refreshment which comes with candid expression.  It may for example exhibit hitherto blurred perceptions; which is to say, it may clarify a problem. Very often we’re aware of dissatisfaction without recognizing an identifiable cause.  Human conduct can be pernicious and thus deliberately or instinctively hidden.  Assessing such conduct is frequently more than the work of a moment. It is a strategy which commands perspicacity.

Notwithstanding the relieving nature of subtlety about an issue, the delicacy must not allow the object to be obscured. We owe it to ourselves to exclude communion with those whom we find intolerable. This abruptness also highlights the value of rising above unwarranted sympathy or excusability of offensive behaviour. There is a point after which we needn’t endure prolonged unhappiness or persistent caution. It may even amount to a helpful admission for both sides of the acquaintance.

Whether all this is conducted in silence or through signals or overtly remains a question of personal preference. I have normally adopted a less than lucid demonstration of my thoughts, arguing to myself that I prefer to sustain at least the appearance of propriety without descending to the open world of what I consider often vulgar truth. It is an ambition on my part which seldom affects anyone else except perhaps to the extent of its absence but certainly not its presence. Ambivalence and ambiguity, the capital of conduct,