Detective skills

From time to time, events inspire me to analyze mom’s behavior in light of RM’s or RM's in light of Mom's. Sometimes Gracie analogies fit as well. It's a subtle audacity that perplexes me--when people do things that I'd never try to pull, I wonder how they get away with it. Have you ever watched the news and thought, did those people just say something obvious and then discuss it, stupidly, for ten minutes? What a sweet job! It's like some people say they'd love to be able to be wrong at the same frequency as meteorologists and still keep there jobs: there are many things I see out there and think, 'it would be nice to get away with that.' Take this study: did people get paid for that research? Perhaps I can do some research as to weather people who have more alcohol in their house are more likely to be alcoholics.

You get my point. Here's where I'm going with this: in my workplace, which is, perhaps not incidentally, staffed by introverts, it is accepted as bad form to waste people's time with questions to which one can look up (or independently think through) the answer. If I'm interviewing someone, I better have done my homework. Not only that, but I want to have done my homework: I'd rather not engage another person in an inquiry when the answer is easily available through reason, observation, or lookup.

My mom, on the other hand, engages in the following behaviors:

-while watching TV, she consistently asks “who’s that?”/ “what’s happening”/ “why did he do that?”

-when traveling, she consistently suggests--nay, demands--that I ask for directions, even when we are not lost.

-when reading, and coming across a word with which she's unfamiliar, she instantly asks me in person, or even by phone if I’m not there, rather than looking it up or figuring it out from context.

I've always seen this primarily, if not exclusively, through the lens of 'lack of observational prowess.' In light of RM, however, I've come to think there’s another thing going on: extroversion. For mom (and RM), such situations are more than requests for information; they're opportunities to engage another person, just like when an extrovert on a plane views its seatmate as an opportunity. But when that seatmate is an introvert, he or she sees the extrovert seatmate as a nightmare. Similarly, the introvert on the receiving end of the gratuitous inquiry doesn’t appreciate being engaged over something that can be easily resolved without his or her involvement. Not to put too fine a point on this, but what I'm trying to convey here is that if RM is asking (unnecessary) questions to make conversation and perhaps build rapport, it's backfiring, because I don't appreciate idiotic banter, particularly when I'm getting ready for work.

I'll digress once more before continuing: I attended a luncheon on the Hill today. When I went up to the buffet to get some water, I placed my notepad and pen on my seat. I came back to find a plateful of food on that seat. I asked the gentleman on the adjacent seat if he would kindly lift that plate so that I might retrieve my notepad. He asked if someone was sitting there. I should have said, "you mean the pad and paper didn't clue you into that?" but instead I just said that I had been but I'd be happy to relocate to the next seat over. But you see my point: if you had some basic detective skills, you'd connect the presence of a pad and paper on a chair with the idea that someone might have claimed that seat.

Similar clues abound as to whether or not I've left for work in the morning. The first thing you see when you come downstairs is the dining room table--specifically, the end upon which my handbag sits when I get ready for work. So when I stepped out this morning--I was gone maybe ten minutes, but probably closer to 5--I came back to a locked front door. Which was fine (I am not the one who doesn't take my keys with me based on the predicted future presence of my roommate). But I digress.

I came in, and RM came downstairs to greet me.

RM: I thought you’d left!
A.: No, I just went to vote.
RM: Oh, that’s right. The election is today. Anyway, sorry I locked the door.
A.: Not a problem.

In and of itself, missing the handbag wasn't a big deal. Whatever--we all overlook stuff. Although he clearly asked himself the question of whether or not I'd left for the day, and didn't take any evidence into consideration upon deciding on an answer. It's really the conversation that followed, however, that got me.

RM: Are you biking today?
A.: Yes. I am taking my imaginary bike, which is why I'm wearing this suit. That's why normally, when I bike to work, you see me in biking clothes, and you also see a bike. But today I'm wearing a suit and going to work on my imaginary bike.


Just kidding. I should have said that. Instead, I said:

A.: No. I left my bike at work yesterday. I’ll bike home today.

***
So maybe my initial reaction, i.e. 'man, RM's a moron,' was unfair: he could figure this stuff out if he wants to by taking three seconds to look around him and do some low-intensity thinking, but why, when you can just ask. Which, when you're an extrovert, is the thing to do. When you're the introvert expected to provide the answer, you have the option of verbally beating the extrovert into regretting he ever asked you a question; you just have to come up with your snarky response in time, rather than minutes later.