Introduction

[Jerry Wierwille]

I like the discussion Cain has on the idea of quiet strength, silent strength, and soft strength and the example of Rosa Parks that she uses to illustrate that concept. I was intrigued by the description of Rosa Parks as someone who was soft-spoken and timid, having radical humility, and quiet fortitude. It really is amazing that someone with such a “non-present” sort of stature would be able to make such an earth-shattering, culture changing statement as simple as two letters that would start a revolution. Of course Rosa Parks would not be the human rights figure we know her to be today without the help of the talented and influential preacher Martin Luther King Jr.

How many people do we know who are “closet introverts”? You know…those introverts who try to put on a mask and play the role of the extrovert in society. I have done this myself. Growing up I tried to fit into the cultural mold of the perfect student…..be the one who is able to speak well in front of people, be charismatic and active in the classroom, be the one who makes everything sound interesting and is willing to be a part of everything……but I will tell you that it does not work well if you are truly not an extrovert. You might be able to play the part for a while, but inevitably you will become tired, disinterested, or down right miserable having to be two-faced in order to please others.

Our culture lives in this extrovert ideal model system that the best kind of person is the alpha, gregarious, and forward. The type of “go-get-them, leap before you look”, bold personality traits. The type of prejudice pointed at introverts is astonishingly similar as the prejudice pointed at women. I really appreciate the comparison Cain made about how an introvert in an extrovert’s world is like a woman in a man’s world. That resonates loudly with me.

It is frustrating to think about how can we rank louder and faster talkers as being smarter and more desirable to be around and better than those who are more contemplative, slow to speak, slow to act, deliberative, cautious, etc. These types of traits are underappreciated and undervalued compared to the spotlight affinity and comfortability of the extrovert. It is a very apparent logical fallacy but no one stops to notice. No one really cares to pull the curtain down.

I like the quote from Winifred Gallagher, “The glory of the disposition that stops to consider stimuli rather than rushing to engage with them is its long association with intellectual and artistic achievement. Neither E=mc² nor Paradise Lost was dashed off by a party animal.”

A very interesting comparison Cain makes is how some animals carry around a shell with them their entire lives. No one thinks that the animal is wrong for doing that or for drawing into it when threatened rather than attacking and fighting back. Thus, why are we as a society trying to push everyone to shed their shell as early as possible and join the rest of us who are “normal”? We are forcing people to behave contrary to their natural dispositions simply because we believe they would be better if they were like “us” (i.e., extroverts).

I don’t think we could express to a high enough degree the damage that is done to adolescent psychological development by the strictures of our society placed upon every person to conform to a specific stereotype of personality. This leaves everyone who is not enough of an extrovert feeling disapproved of, un-valued, and/or defective in some way. This directly affects a person’s self-image and self-esteem. When condemned for their personality, people will likely think that something is literally wrong with them, and therefore, they will always feel they need to be someone different in order to please the crowd and fit in with everyone else or to just be normal and healthy. It is not surprising that people feel like society is telling them to be someone else….to be like everyone else….because for some reason they think it’s “better.”

I like the way that Cain describes how introverts prefer environments that are not overly stimulating but adequate enough to allow for personal thinking, freedom to be able to step away, and the idea of having more intimate and personal conversations than group conversations. I like that atmosphere. I think it helps bring people together in ways that the loud party, lots of people talking, and everyone chiming in at random times doesn’t allow.

It’s funny to me how our culture tries to downplay the value of introvert personalities, especially the lack of “socialness” (social integration) they displayed, while they are very interested in the type of value that introvert types are capable of producing. It’s like our culture wants to have their cake and eat it too. They want everyone to act and think a certain way (i.e., extroverts) but also then be able to produce the same creative and intellectually advanced art, technology, literature, music, etc. that comes from having mental processes and personal aptitudes that are common among a different personality type (i.e., introverts). Our society is very interested in the type of value that introverts are capable of producing but rarely attribute it to their personality characteristics as the unique personal quality behind many great works of art, literature, and music, discoveries, inventions, and technology.

From Cain’s introduction, I have acquired a new motto for my social ambitions in life. I want to live by the words of E. M. Forster “Only connect”…..regardless of everything else that’s what life is all about!  🙂

“Only connect! That was the whole of her sermon.
Only connect the prose and the passion, and both will be exalted,
And human love will be seen at its height.
Live in fragments no longer.
Only connect….”   ~E. M. Forster, Howards End, 1910 (excerpt)

[Author]

Posts