Most
species arrange themselves in juxtapositions which are indicative of purpose or
customary convenience. A lone eagle grasps a rocky crag or high, bare branch:
He takes a position which will offer the best vantage point from which to sight
a salmon swimming upstream, a rabbit pausing in a clearing. A trio of lions
hunting: Their proximity is guided by expediency, the strategy which will
result in the separation of a slow calf, a lame elder, a single zebra in panic
and tiring. Elephants circle for collective protection, penguins for warmth.
What about people? When they are safe and comfortable, people are gregarious.
They seek convivial exchange and the reassurance of belonging, similarity to
each other. People congregate in various situations for specific purposes: In
church, with each individual reflecting on a speaker’s words, people sit in
pews. In a theater, attentive to a sequence of actions designed for their
appreciation – not participation – people sit in rows. The arrangement is the
same, expanded, at soccer and baseball games. Viewers are not in attendance to
perform. But what about a business meeting? Each person present will be somehow
judged according to their input, the timeliness of a suggestion, the
interjection of pertinent wit.
Many communal rituals, from primitive to
pompous, take place in a circular conformation, with a common view of each face,
each voice having equal value. A party? How do people situate themselves at a
party where everybody’s having a good time? Do party-goers naturally convene in
lines along the walls? Reiterating: people are naturally gregarious – i.e.
social, companionable, tending to “flock” together. This characteristic relates
to what is most inherent in humans – their dependence on communication.
Language teachers study, among many things, strategies to propitiate
communication – natural, spontaneous exchanges between humans of all ages.
 |
| Katy Cox |
