Inkwell: Authors and Artists

    
Putting on my reading glasses to fix typos...

Honestly, I tried to read this book before the topic was started, but
life got in my way...

...and that leads to my question!  Do you look at the rules for
different cultures and religions on what counts as an apology and
their rules(?) for when someone has to respond and how?  There are
times I'm not sure if I should apologize or if the other party should
given their belief systems that are different than mine.

I do want to read your book so I'm ok with spoilers. :-)
  

    
We agree that some sins are unforgivable. And we talk in the book
about that. jnfr, I think with both our advice and that of
Maimonides, take  what you need and what resonates for you and
ignore the rest.

When apology research doesn't take race and gender into account, I
(Sumac mostly wrote the stuff on historical and governmental
apologies, and I mostly wrote the stuff on brain science, psych and
sociology studies) I am suspicious of it. apologies do not occur on
a level playing field when it comes to power. and yes, jet,
different cultures, families, and countries have different
perspectives on the role of apology. Japan, for instance, values
apology as a ritual much more than America does, but power (one
Japanese study looked at how much an apology from a CEO was trusted
as opposed to Joe Schmoe, and the CEO's apology was far less
trusted) still has a huge role in how apologies are viewed and
accepted. 
  

    
Gaetz/Beekman!

<https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/02/rep-matt-gaetz-under-fire-for-
inviting-accused-murderer-to-recite-pledge-of-allegiance>

'...Gaetz was a bit defensive of his office, explaining “we don’t have
access to any type of surveillance technology or databases that would rise
to the level of even some of the folks you’d see in your local police
department.” Gaetz continued, “We do have a team of dedicated young
professionals who don’t look for and assume the worst in our constituents,
especially our veterans."'

We didn't know, and we shouldn't have known, because that's so
DISRESPECTFUL OF THOSE WHO SERVED?
  

    
That story as usual unbelievable, Everything about Matt Gaetz is
unbelievable. 

Answering the question above, yes, I know people who just can't
apologize. I wonder what one can do about that--to send them a copy
of SORRY SORRY SORRY would seem a bit passive aggressive, though it
would help them (if they want to be helped) immeasurably.

I see this area of apologies as kind of continuous with the
practices of what I know about under the name of "non-violent
communication." Both take a kind of alertness of awareness, and both
advocate change for the good when things become sticky between us
humans. NVC can be practiced from one side only. Can the knowledge
of what a good apology is be?

Are there also people who can't *accept* an apology --even a very
good one-- for the life of them? I think there must be people
attached to their huff-state.  But as you point out, that rightly
made apology can transform the sayer, whether or not it's accepted.

Just last night, I had a pang moment. An email had gone unanswered
longer than I expected, I thought about what I'd sent, and I
immmediately sent off a Sorrywatch-informed apology.

The reply this morning was more than gracious--no, I hadn't
transgressed, and of course the person was fine with what I'd done.
"You were having Night Worries, weren't you?" they kindly asked. 

But I think they still liked having received it anyhow. And I really
liked having sent it, because that moment of acute *consciousness*
for me will, I hope, make me more aware of the same kind of thing in
the future, beforehand. Even if it didn't bother this person, it
could have.
  

    
Night Worries! There's also the Morning Dreads. Sometimes the only
relief is the Afternoon OhFuckIts.
  

    
Time to light the "My Last Fuck, It's On Fire" candle!

Jane, I love the notion that NVC can be practiced from one side
only. I suspect we can cultivate an attitude toward apology that
works similarly?  It would go something like this: "Here's what I
know I can do when I owe someone an apology. I know HOW to do it; I
know WHY it's healthy for me and for the world to do it. I know that
when I apologize well, and not in a half-assed weaselly manner, I
will feel better (CUE MARJORIE ASKING SUSAN, AS SHE OFTEN DOES, TO
TALK ABOUT THE ZEIGERNIK EFFECT)regardless of the outcome." And then
you do it. 

But as you note (and I paraphrase, because I am not a poet --
IANAP),  apologies work best when two people are willing to tango.
Which means we should all try to cultivate a worldview that allows
for forgiveness and redemption, without being a sucker or a sap
about it. 

We think that's doable; we talk about how in the book. But basically
it's about making a choice that you value a given relationship even
if the other person is flawed. (I have a tattoo from the children's
book Bread and Jam for Frances, but in another Frances book, her
mother asks her to consider forgiving a friend who has behaved badly
by saying "Would you rather be right, or friends?") 

We believe that people can learn and grow, which means giving them
(MOST of them? MANY of them?) the opportunity to try. We definitely
don't think you should accept gaslight-y, insincere apologies. But
what about saying "I would like you to apologize" to someone who you
suspect feels bad, or who is capable of being educated about why
they SHOULD feel bad? What about saying to someone who apologizes
poorly, "I appreciate your apology, but here's why it doesn't
actually address what I'm upset about; here's what I'd like you to
actually take ownership of"? 

There are definitely people who are "attached to their huff-state,"
as Jane puts it. If it's a legit, unsolvable offense that no apology
could help (hi, George Santos!), refusing to forgive isn't being
attached to a huff-state. Being theatrically self-righteous to/about
someone capable of being better IS being attached to the huff-state.
  

    
Night worries! I will come back to this and mention the Zeigarnik
Effect.

There are indeed people who don't WANT to accept an apology, who
plan to hang on to a perfectly good grudge. One approach is to
say "I get the feeling you didn't find my apology adequate. Is
there something I should have said but didn't?" This gives them
a chance to express a genuine complaint ("You apologized for
saying my banana bread was gummy, but you still didn't give me
your mom's recipe.") or perhaps to say that they need some time
to get over it. In which case you might ask how much time. Or
say you'd hate to feel that this was still goign to come between
you...

In researching animal learning -- and people trying to teach
animals things -- it became clear to me that the best way to
learn a lot of things is to witness someone else being taught.
Not to be taught, but to see the teaching process and witness
the blunders of another. Examples are someone spending time
teaching a small dog to jump up in a rocking chair and rock it --
the teacher was an expert animal behaviorist with a supply of
fabulous training snacks, and the dog learned within (um?) half
an hour. As soon as the dog got down, a cat who had been
watching this jumped up on the chair, rocked it, and looked
around for a fabulous training snack. Or one orangutan
watching a researcher teach a task to another orang. The
observer orang didn't have to be taught herself, because she
knew from watching the pitiful attempts of the first one.

So I think that the best way to learn about apologies is to
watch others try to make a good apology, and say to yourself,
"Ooh, she said 'Sorry IF" and that did not go over well." etc.
That's one thing we're doing in the book and on the SorryWatch
website.
  

    
Another animal parallel may be in a passage about dolphins from
*The Social Lives of Animals* by Ashley Ward:

"...a chiding note that angry mothers produce if a calf fails to come to
them when called. Calves are easy prey for sharks, as well as potentially
being targets for the aggression of other dolphins, so it’s little wonder
that the mothers are worried when they stray. A mother may discipline the
errant calf further by pressing her beak against the calf’s side and
angrily buzzing, or, in an extreme case, by holding her calf against the
seabed for a few moments. After a telling off, the calf may seek to pacify
its mother by stroking her head with its pectoral flipper."

A caveat is that although this passage is on a page with references,
the references don't perfectly match up to the passage. One from the
journal *Aquatic Mammals* describes the call, the buzzing, and the
pinioning against the seabed, but doesn't mention the appeasing
calf. The one from *Animal Cognition* has none of this. I may need
to ask Ward directly, if I can.
  

    <scribbled by sumac Fri 3 Mar 23 15:58>
  

    
Is there an extra "un" in the second paragraph?
  

    


“Unfinished tasks are remembered approximately twice
 as well as uncompleted ones,”

i don't understand the difference between unfinished and uncompleted?
  

    

slippage. (meaning, someone posted at the same time i was composing my
post.) looks like a typo may have been involved, we're both confused!
  

    
You are right! I messed up.

It should say "“Unfinished tasks are remembered approximately twice
  as well as uncomcompleted ones."

I think I'll delete that and repost.

Thanks for catching that.
  

    
Okay, Zeigarnik Effect.

 A bunch of psychologists hanging out in a Berlin restaurant
 discovered the Zeigarnik Effect, by noticing what the waiters did and did
 not remember. The waiters had amazing memories – until the bill was paid.
 Then, amnesia. If two big tables of customers came in at the same time, the
 waiters knew exactly what had been ordered at the table where the bill
 hadn't been paid yet. But they didn't remember the orders from the table
 where the bill had been paid.

 Bluma Zeigarnik did experimental studies that showed this superpower isn't
 only for waitstaff. “Unfinished tasks are remembered approximately twice
 as well as completed ones,” she wrote. (After all, why clutter your
 brain with useless old information?)

 It seems to us that if you messed up somehow, and didn't apologize, and it
 still weighs on you, or bugs you when you wake up at four a.m., you might
 try deploying the Zeigarnik Effect. That mess is an unfinished task. An
 apology can turn that unfortunate episode into a finished one, and allow
you
 to stop wincing at the memory.

 It might even stop being a memory. Sumac knows this from past events she
 wanted to write about for SorryWatch, but can no longer remember well
 enough. Once she said a stupid thing, meant as a joke (uh huh). It kept
 bothering her until she invited Nicole to lunch and apologized. It stopped
 bothering her so completely that now she can't remember the stupid thing
she
 said. Damn it. That would've been perfect for SorryWatch.
  

    
Wow. Thanks for the Zeigarnik Effect.  Now I know that whenever I
need to remember something I can go to a restaurant and walk out
without paying the bill.


But about this watching others learn thing. I think you two should
be aware that the SorryWatch topic has been shaping the minds and
emotions of WELLbeings now for several years and it totally shows.
Woe unto those who deliver a sorry-if. And woe also to those who say
"well, they apologized, so that's the end of it, right?"
  

    
I've waited a lot of tables and  Zeigarnik Effect is very real.
Friend of mine is a bar manager at a really busy mexican place and can
remember orders for ~6 between taking them and entering them on the
computer.  Then it's gone, baby, gone.
  

    
I'm going to be absent for until Sunday afternoon. I'd like to leave
the conversation with this: a reminder of what the steps are for
further discussion, and one more question.

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.) 

***

And the question: I can be sorry in the truest sense (feeling
sorrow) when I've done something that I didn't and still don't think
is wrong, but someone is offended or pained by it. In other words:
"I'm sorry for your pain." 

How does one exercise any of the steps beyond that without falling
into what sound like excuses? 

Example: I build a house featuring a salvaged stained-glass window
on the front. You're shattered; that's the last window your dad the
artisan made before he died, and you're horrified it will never be
yours now. You can't stop crying.

I didn't do anything wrong, but I genuinely want to express my sorry
for what this is putting you through. If I explain how I found it,
didn't know it was your dad's work, didn't mean to hurt you - well,
that's all the wrong things, kind of. Explain, excuse.

Are there better words than "sorry" for this?
  

    
the sense of incompleteness is very intriguing; thinking of decent
folks i know who can NOT apologize and yet, much more flawed folks
who can. somehow the decent non-apologizers dont feel a rend in the
social fabric that is incompletely mended...
  

    
Angie, what an interesting example! I think this is a case where a
short explanation would be useful: "I had no idea. I saw it in an
antique store, with no information about who made it."

I'm sorry I caused you pain.
I used your father's last work in my house without acknowledging him.
You were shocked to see the window your father made in someone
else's house, and your hope to own the window yourself is shattered.
I had no idea. I found it in an antique store, with no information
about who made it.
If I'm in a similar situation in the future, I'll try very hard to
find out who made any contemporary art that I want to feature in a
home I'm building.
Would you like to be able to come over sometimes and sit in the
room that has your father's window and spend time with his work?
Can we make a sign or plaque that identifies you father as the
artist?

I think that's a decent apology. I don't think "I had no idea" is
an excuse here. It's an explanation. How could you know? But you
need to say it so the person knows you weren't thinking "Ha ha,
I got this window by X for cheap, won't Y be surprised when they
see their dad's window on the street frontage!"

This is a SEPARATE CONVERSATION from "What was the window even
doing in an antique shop? You apparently didn't keep track of it,
so how could you expect it would be yours?" or "It's a %^$%#%
window! If it's installed in a house, that's a GOOD THING" or
"You seem to have a lot of unresolved guilt around your father
and his work, are you getting therapy?"

All subjects that might be raised in a SEPARATE CONVERSATION, with
kinder wording.

...can I come over and see your window, Angie?
  

    
I love this window example!

<loris>, I think a lot of people never learned to apologize as kids;
it's a learned skill, like any other. many folks were never taught
and never saw it modeled, which could contribute to the phenomenon
of decent people who can't apologize and mediocre people who can. 
  

    
(dont want to hijack this discussion about the difficulties wrt
nature/nurture, but this topic has really got me thinking about a
relative who privately confesses to his sociopathic tendencies ---
but can apologize for real and for true. by contrast, some folks of
my aquaintance, also with problematic childhoods, but in most
respects decent --- not very capable apologizers). 

morality; psychology; cognitive blind spots: so much embedded in the
art + science of apology.
  

    
One factor that may enter into unwillingness to apologize is learned
fear (or generalized fearfulness): if you were made to apologize and
then attacked/lectured to, you may not trust the process.

And since part of a decent apology is admitting fault or at least
imperfection, some people have a hard time bringing themselves to
that point. They are scared of being vulnerable in any way.
  

    
#72 makes tons of sense.
  

    
I had a flash last night that so much of a good apology has to do
with that 1:1 engagement that many of us find hard. It's showing
that you _heard_ that you caused harm. Part of that is how you'll do
better, too, but it's that "I heard you. I caused you pain." That
matters perhaps as much or more than the redress. 

Of course, sometimes the harm is to great for an apology to matter,
etc., but I think we're mostly talking about what it takes to make
an apology when it is possible - not what an apology from Hitler
would look like, or even what the apology from the person(s) whose
ineptitude enabled the release of covid-19 from the Wuhan Lab (if
that's what happened) could conceivably be.
  

    
(Ari's post slipped in while I was typing, and totally agree with
it, and with how much the listening part matters)

Being *able* to make a good apology seems to be deeply intertwined
with deeper issues of character as well as cultural/familial
training. 

But because I believe that we human beings are not fixed in stone, I
also think that *learning* to make a good apology, and the
reinforcement that comes from experiencing what happens if one does,
might lead to some rearranging of long-seated inner dynamics.

This book can be transformational in so many ways!