Inkwell: Authors and Artists

    
Marjorie Ingall and Susan McCarthy visit Inkwell for a two-week
discussion of their overview and guide to apologies, _Sorry, Sorry,
Sorry: The Case for Good Apologies_. In their book, they draw on a
deep well of research in psychology, sociology, law, and medicine to
explain why a good apology is hard to find and why it doesn't have
to be. Alongside their six (and a half)-step formula for apologizing
beautifully, Ingall and McCarthy also delve into how to respond to a
bad apology; why corporations, celebrities, and governments seldom
apologize well; how to teach children to apologize; how gender and
race affect both apologies and forgiveness; and most of all, why
good apologies are essential, powerful, and restorative. Susan and
Marjorie have a website called "Sorrywatch"
<https://sorrywatch.com/> where they analyze apologies in the news,
media, history and literature.

Marjorie Ingall, who goes by Snarly on SorryWatch.com (and obizuth
on The Well), is the author of Mamaleh Knows Best and The Field
Guide to North American Males, and the co-author of Hungry. A former
columnist for Tablet magazine and the Forward, she is a frequent
contributor to The New York Times Book Review and has also written
for New York magazine, Town & Country, Ms., Glamour, Self, Elle, and
Sassy (yes, that one). 

Susan McCarthy, who goes by Sumac on SorryWatch.com (and on The
WELL)writes about wildlife and animal behavior. She's co-author of
When Elephants Weep: The Emotional Lives of Animals, and author of
Becoming a Tiger: How Baby Animals Learn to Live in the Wild. She's
been on the Well forever. A carbon-based life form, she is a native
of Earth. "I love your sunsets," she reports.

Angie Coiro leads the conversation. Angie's voice and interviews
have been staples for Bay Area radio, TV, live event, and podcast
fans since the 1990s. Fifteen of those years were at KQED as radio
announcer, news anchor, host of Friday Forum, and TV pledge drive
host. She moved to the national airwaves with Mother Jones Radio on
Air America. She recently retired her syndicated radio show In Deep
when it reached its fifteenth anniversary.
  

    
Hello Marjorie, Susan, Jon, and all! This is gonna be fun.

Let's dive right in with the most basic element: what is an apology
*for*? Because the variety of apologies in the book and on your blog
seem to serve different purposes. The most obviously bad ones serve
the purpose of dodging and deflecting responsibility - even making
the apologizer look like the good guy. 

The good ones (or at least, the better ones) show the apologizer
smoothing ruffled feathers, diffusing a small blowup before it gets
bigger, reasserting a friendship, assuring the apologizee that it
won't happen again. Lots of variety there.

So if you strip it all down: what is the *purpose* of a good
apology? 
  

    
Once you've tackled that - and again, developing the very basics
here: Sorry Sorry Sorry specifies the elements of a good apology.
What are those elements? And - in the case of each - if that element
were missing, how does it ding the value of that particular apology?
  

    

>What is the *purpose* of a good
 apology?

To fix things between people. Mostly individuals, sometimes groups.

We recently began using the analogy of kintsugi. This is a Japanese
art of repairing broken ceramics. Imagine a plate broken into, say,
5 pieces. Imagine those pieces glued back into their previous
shape, with the cracks visible and perhaps gilded. It is useful
again and often more beautiful than before.

It is possible to repair a damaged relationship between people so
that it works again, and because of the process of apology and
acceptance of apology, is more beautiful than before.
  

    
Ooh, I love that analogy.

And you go beyond that to credit good apologies to making a better
world. Strikes me that's as much about the awareness and honesty
between people in any kind of relationship. You can't make a good
apology - at work, between friends, anywhere - without having to
exercise humility and needs beyond your own. 

And the elements of a good apology? And while we're at it, why 6 and
a half of them? Why not seven?
  

    
Here's our interview with a wonderful kintsugi artist on SorryWatch:
<https://sorrywatch.com/apologies-in-lacquer-and-gold/>

And Angie, yes! A guy on Twitter who mostly reads business books
just tweeted at me that he was reading our book and thinking how it
might help the cartoonist Scott Adams. I replied: "One thing that's
key to a good apology is being able to give someone else's feelings
and experiences primacy over your own. I don't see Adams doing that,
alas."

To answer your question: Not every apology requires all 6.5 steps.
Sometimes you just say "I'm sorry" and you're done. If you step on
someone's foot, you don't need us to make you a chart about what to
do! 

The 6.5 steps are: 

1. Say "I'm sorry" or "I apologize." Not "I wanted to apologize for"
or "I regret." SAY THE WORDS. (We can talk about why those specific
formulations are the right ones later, but we bet most people can
guess.) 

2. Say what you're sorry FOR. Name the thing. Not "the situation" or
"what happened."

3. Show you understand why it was bad/wrong/a cause of pain.

4. If you need to offer some explanation, BE CAREFUL; don't let
explanation become excuse. (This is the hardest step for me, btw.)

5. Explain what you're doing to ensure it never happens again. 

6. Make reparations, if that's possible. 

6.5 = LISTEN. People want to be heard. Let them talk. Let them
discuss why they're upset. It's .5 because you don't SAY or DO
anything except bear witness. (And indeed, you shouldn't interject
when you're letting them have their say.) 
  

    
Admittedly I'm being picky here, but: looking at step 1, it seems
itself a bit too picky. Isn't an apology more than words? It's also
body language, tone - and more, less-quantifiable things.

If some shy soul does something that offends me, comes stumbling up
with eyes cast down, and mumbles, "I wanted to apologize ...", isn't
there some obligation on my part - the part of the offended - to
take context into consideration? Knowing the limitations of the
apologizer, should I as a decent person to say "okay, good enough"?
  

    
Great question. 

Every apology acceptance is up to the person being given the
apology. Every incident of forgiveness is up to the person who
decides to forgive. 

For example, I read with interest Lisa Jobs's discussion of her
choice to forgive her father Steve. He was a godawful father. I
wouldn't have forgiven him. But it's her call to make, not mine. 

If you know the person who shuffles up to you is doing their level
best, and you value the relationship and you don't care to say, "I
would feel better if you actually said the words 'I'm sorry,' not
'I'm apologetic' or 'I regret' or 'I'd like to apologize'" that is
100 percent up to you. But in MOST CASES, people who avoid saying
"I'm sorry" or "I apologize" aren't truly owning their behavior. 

That said -- and Susan is the animal behavior expert here -- when a
puppy who has nipped you too hard while playing with you comes to
you with his ears and head down, keeping his lil puppy body close to
the ground, and he whines a little and licks you, he's not saying
"I'm sorry" but he's CLEARLY apologizing. (ALSO OMG SO CUTE.) So
yes, body language and tone do matter. On the flip side, too: If
someone says the "correct" words but with an eye-roll or a deep sigh
of aggravation, FEH. 

Being sympathetic about people's limitations can be a good thing, or
it can be self-negating thing that leads to you accepting less than
you deserve. LIFE SHE IS COMPLICATED NO? 
  

    
(Picking myself up from death-by-cuteness with the puppy example.)

Let's stick with phrasing as we move to step 2. I'm particularly
focusing on "the situation". Definitely I've heard that used as a
wienie phrase. Is that possibly acceptable though, as deliberate
avoidance of re-triggering pain?

Help me with being as specific as possible without resorting to "I'm
sorry I called you a four-eyed hag". In a sense, something as simple
as "I'm sorry I hurt your feelings" could sound like a dodge in the
face of real pain.
  

    
Again, great question. It's almost as if you do this for a living. 

And again, yep to your specific question -- if naming the thing will
cause more pain, don't do it. Anyone apologizing for using a racist
slur shouldn't repeat the slur. ("A slur" will do. BUT if you're
making a public apology, you don't get to apologize for "what I said
last week." You do have to say you used a derogatory, hateful term
for a specific group of people.) And if, say, you're apologizing for
having an affair, the person you're apologizing to doesn't need to
know all the awesome things you and the other person did in bed. 

We can come back to this, but one of our reasons NOT to apologize is
if doing so would hurt the other person. If sleeping dogs (again
with the puppies!) were lying, comfortably, undisturbed, think hard
about why you WOULDN'T just let them lie? 

Sometimes it's because you're seeking absolution for something the
person you're apologizing to would prefer not to talk about -- for
example, we have advice in the book for folks who are beginning a
recovery journey. Kudos to them, but they need to be careful about
making amends or spewing their fearless moral inventory at someone
who isn't expecting to hear from them, who may not know the extent
of their long-ago wrongdoing, or who were really hurt or who are
OVER THEM and may not WANT to hear from them. 

A good apology puts the other person's feelings front and center.
That's why "regret" isn't a satisfying word in an apology -- b/c
regret is about how the speaker feels, not about how the LISTENER
feels. 

So yeah, if apologizing would cause hurt, you don't get the
privilege of apologizing. 

But here's how you could apologize for calling someone a four-eyed
hag: 

"I'm sorry I was such a dick to you. I called you a name that was
utterly uncalled for, as well as untrue. There's no excuse for what
I said. I really value our relationship and I know I need to work on
my temper. I hope one day I'll be able to earn back your trust and
friendship." 
  

    
Perfect. It's like you do this for a living! 

With the promise I'll return to the elements in due time - you
brought up public apologies, as opposed to private. What a great
opening to hear some of the worst public apologies you've deal with
on Sorrywatch, and the analyses you applied to them. Give us dirt! A
couple of the most delicious big ones!
  

    
This conversation is world-readable, i.e. can be read by anyone on
or off the WELL, the online community platform that is hosting the
two week discussion. 

Here's a short link for access: https://tinyurl.com/sorry-well The
full link is
https://people.well.com/conf/inkwell.vue/topics/525/Marjorie-Ingall-and-Susan-
McCart-page01.html 

If you're reading this conversation, and you're not a member of the
WELL, you won't be able to post directly. However if you have a
comment or question, send it to inkwell at well.com, and we'll post
it here.

If you're not a member of the WELL, but you'd like to participate in
more conversations like this, you can join the WELL:
<https://www.well.com/join/>  The WELL is an online conferencing
system and a virtual community with ongoing intelligent
conversations about many subjects - a great alternative to drive-by
posting on social media.

This conversation will last for at least two weeks, through March
13. In order to read the whole conversation, we encourage you to
return regularly and use the more link and the pager.
  

    
not sure how the phrase this question exactly, but there is a
category of apology which in effect is 'sorry i got caught'. a lot
of kids' apologies take this form: as a child, you are socialized (a
good thing, imho) into apologizing to create the interpersonal
knowhow for future more graver apologies --- even as a kid what you
are apologizing for is, um, a pecadillo.

so many public apologies feel like 'underneath it all, i am sorry i
got caught'. and 'my career/public persona demand i apologize.'. in
this situation, the apologizer has to go through the moves and there
perhaps is a public good in doing so --- but the offender doesn't
really have the choice to Not Perform tne Apology Dance.

i guess my feeling is, as pointed out above, empathy is the most
important thing. omfg, i hurt you sorry sorry sorry.

(back to sorrywatcher expertise).
  

    
Yes! Some of the signs of "sorry I got caught" are complaints about
how the apologizer is suffering from having gotten caught, apologizing
to the team instead of those actually injured, and insistent calls to
put this behind us and to MOVE ON, PEOPLE.

I think of BP CEO Tony Hayward after the *Deepwater Horizon*
explosion and spill.

"I'm sorry. We're sorry for the massive disruption it's caused their
lives. There's no one who wants this over more than I do. I'd like my
life back."

<https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bp-ceo-tony-hayward-video_n_595906>

An apology SO bad, he had to apologize for the apology.

<https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bp-ceo-tony-hayward-apologizes-life-
back_n_597966>
  

    
even the apologies that tick all the boxes --- often feel to me that
what's behind them is 'sorry i got caught'. feigning remorse seems
to be part of the package, now? sociopaths can be good at faking
empathy..which is why sometimes i wonder what the value is of the
Forced Apology...except that the apologizer has been forced to
commit a certain speech act --- which may have some value in itself.
  

    
That puts me in mind of Hugh Grant's public apology for being caught
soliciting a sex worker. First - it was ridiculous that it was
perceived to be anyone's business but his, but that's the world we
live in. But he was in fact backed into a corner where he had to
satisfy the public's misplaced slavering for justice. He was forced
to apologize. 

If memory serves, part of what carried it off was his skill in
playing off his established on-screen character - charming, boyish,
adorably abashed. In that case, I think as well as displaying
empathy with all the busybodies who were demanding his comeuppance,
he *created* empathy. The public went from being completely in his
corner, to angrily tut-tutting, then back again, all because he
grabbed their empathy again. 

So: the value of empathy on both sides of the apology.

Slippage*. Oh god, the Hayward apology debacle! I'd forgotten that
one. 

And what loris said: ironically, the people who find mouthing a
"good" apology easiest are probably the least likely to mean it.

(to our off-Well readers: "slip", "slippage", or "<puffball>
slipped" means someone else's post popped up while you were
composing your own  post.)
  

    
I know this is a complete side bar to toss in so early in the
conversation here, but I was so absolutely taken by the book's
opening/end of introduction: "How to Apologize TO Your Dog."
(Emphasis added, because the above is about the dog apologizing to
you.)

Since our social systems go back to our history as pre-human beings,
I wonder is Sumac has any other examples to offer about how apology
works in the other-than-human world. Do cats apologize? Or is it
only pack/flock/herd animals that do? Do all pack/flock/herd, or
only the hierarchical ones?

The roots of the need to apologize feel to me biologically
deep--part of the intricate communication system that lets multiple
beings (of a certain kind) negotiate living, playing, fighting,
cooperating together without just killing one another over trivial
matters.
  

    


i would be curious to hear y'all's advices on how to bounce back when an
apology is not accepted by someone you've harmed. even a good apology. 

especially at issue is: uhhh, what if you're neurodivergent, neuroatypical,
or have a mental illness? i am in this category, and have friends and
family who are, too. i never quite know when it's cool to simply judge and
set boundaries, and when it would be much cooler to accept that these folks
are never going to act all perfect like an advice columnist might suggest.

would you recommend that neurotypical people take a different approach 
with those who've sustained a head injury, or are on the ASD spectrum, or
have bipolar or severe anxiety, PMDD or hellacious perimenopause? or are
all potential apologizers to be treated the same?

kind of like the shy-shuffling
person mentioned above, perhaps; if they have severe social anxiety, or if,
for that matter, they haven't happened to read SorryWatch, should we be
expecting them to act in a certain way when they apologize? 
  

    
(am so not a sorrywatcher but i think ms. tiff has articulated a
larger deeper question: what do we a right to expect from others, in
terms of considerateness? where do we each draw the line wrt
acceptable behavior in others?)
  

    
TIFF, your question tugs at something I've noticed in the <few>
negative comments I've read in reviews of Sorry Sorry Sorry: that
the 6.5 steps makes it sound like a formula. Your question, if I can
presume I understand it, is "what about people who respond
differently to formulas?"

and all I can say (but i'm not an apology expert) is that healing
the relationship is the goal, and that there can be any number of
things in the way of that healing.  One might be all those things
you did in bed having that affair. But another might be a disconnect
in how two or more people communicate, or how they express
themselves. 

Since we talked about puppy apologies, I'll share this: many years
ago my dog was run over, and was lying in the road, suffering. I
reached out to comfort her, and she bit my hand. I don't know what I
was thinking, but i reached out with my other hand and she bit that,
too. Then I backed away a few feet. And she began dragging herself
toward me.

I think we were apologizing to each other.
  

    

oh wow. that is such a powerful and moving, and startling, image. 
  

    
Oh god, Paul
  

    


I'm so sorry. (In that other sense of the word... )
  

    
<loris>, what did you mean by "am so not a sorrywatcher"?
  

    
Oh, Paul, that's heartbreaking. Utterly. I'm sorry, for both you and
your dog. 

As for apologies to and from folks with disabilities, folks in
peri/menopause, folks who are neurospicy (I recently learned this
term and love it!) -- look, everyone has limitations and quirks. We
all still have to do the work of apologizing well and evaluating
whether to accept or reject (or ask for revisions on) an apology we
receive. In my experience with autistic folks, systems and rules can
actually be very helpful. (As is the advice to look at someone's
forehead or hairline if you have trouble with eye contact.) My
autistic kid really likes running thru the 6.5 steps in their head,
since they sometimes have trouble with social cues. 

As we've said, not every step is necessary in every situation. But
the 6.5 cover all the bases, which can be helpful. Also, Paul's so
right about "if healing the relationship is the goal, there can be
any number of things in the way of that healing." Apologies aren't a
panacea (and there are acts that are unforgivable) but they are a
great tool in the arsenal. 

And again, to repeat: Anyone who receives a direct apology is free
to accept, reject, or ask for a revised version. 
  

    
Rule 6.5 is important and useful. I don't think it's an
afterthought. Listen before you formulate an apology and listen
after you communicate it. No matter what the other's neurotype,
think about who they are and how they're likely to hear what you
say.