You know, one thing I can’t stand is for someone to keep on talking when I’m trying to inturrupt!
Yes, I did forget that. Sorry. I also forgot to mention that it wasn’t a personal conversation; in fact it was work-related and involved a project that I’d started myself, which this guy knew. And I forgot to mention that this took place in a cramped, East Hollywood kitchen (filled with a bunch of Peruvians, no less) where it would but be all but impossible not to “hover.” If he’d wanted a precious tête-à-tête he should have gone out to the porch or some place like that. Yes, I could have said “excuse me,” but that would just have seemed silly in the context. (“Excuse me, Raji, but if you’ll remember correctly, I did that particular interview, and could say a few things about it from first hand experience” etc., which he well knew. In certain social contexts, there is something we call “common courtesy.”) And I wasn’t expecting any particular reaction or being defensive; I just thought it was a little strange. (In fact, come to think of it, the guy was kind of strange in general.)
And since I don’t wear “knickers,” (whatever they are) I wouldn’t even know how to get them in a twist, least of all about you (which is not to be rude or offensive or anything; I just didn’t think you’d care that much about my clothing).
And you’re not the only one to consider “hovering” rude in certain contexts–in the work place, it definitely is uncalled for, since many projects are “private” in workspace environments, and I completely agree with you.
As someone stated above, context is everything. If I’d actually been “passive-aggressive,”–however convenient and popular a term like like that is for someone simply being circumspect-- the result might have been quite different. I just brushed the whole thing off.
You know, one thing I can’t understand is people who can’t conceive of a conversation which involves more than two people who talk in perfect turns which never overlap. Maybe it’s just a cultural thing. But I can certainly tell and respect when two people who are talking don’t need a third, and I’ll stay out. Still, if you recorded (and I mean literally, with a video camera) all the conversations that you heard in your life you’d find many, many “interruptions” that are considered perfectly appropriate, or at least not offensive. The Aristotelian ideal of “dialog” is exactly that: an ideal, not a reality. Real language is chaos much more often that it is Hollywood script. But that my be hard to realize if you’ve been raised on TV and Hollywood scripts. For that matter, just log onto one of those innane “chatrooms”: “Any girls out there want to chat?” (“Sure. There’s a crank addict at the bus stop on the corner who’d loved to meet you. Go for it, dude.”)
If you’d spend some time in the South Pacific, you’d learn that “announcing” one’s presense is a very different thing than Dilbert style cubicle life (which, thank Og, is not the majority of workspace in this world, not to mention that Dilbert is a pretty stupid comic, IMHO). In Western Somoa, for example what you expect is extremely disrespectful. Younger people always come to older people (who, by virture of their age, are not expected to move as much, or recognize younger people), and younger people must wait to be recognized. It’s a sign of respect, and , in fact, children in Western Somoa learn the verb “go” before they learn the verb “come,” because they don’t have the social status that requires others to “come” to them.
So I agree, in the pathetic “Dilbert” world, go ahead and ignore someone who doesn’t have the “grace” to say “excuse me.” But you might also benefit to know that there are many more kinds of “grace” than you might dream on in this world.
I understand that you are talking about the (IMHO lame) Dilbert environment
I don’t mean to be critical at all; I recognize your feelings full well, and I feel the same way quite often.
It’s ok to hover briefly until an appropriate break in the conversation, then say “excuse me” to deliver your message.
Or you could go the opposite route - cut the conversation mid-sentence and tell the other person to “go get us a few drinks”.
Of course! But that’s not the kind of hovering that was being discussed here.
Heh. 
I always consider it fairly rude to be as vague as “Do you consider this rude?” in a thread title.
Well, I consider it to be a kind of “Dear Abby” type of thing. The advantage is that you get a variety of viewpoints, rather than just one. Ironically (perhaps), you never really get a straight answer to solve your pesonal situation. But then, what makes Abby’s daughters any more authoratative?
I think Misnomer great user name, by the way! has expressed some very helpful views regarding office interactions, though I have brought up possible exceptions, and didn’t really express myself well initially.
But you raise a very good point, pseudotrition ruber ruber (another great user name that I don’t understand.). While I don’t consider it to be rude to ask a vaque question, very rarely does one get a consensus on IMHO. Which makes it both amusing and frustrating.
I guess that’s kind of what IMHO is all about.
I can think of a great number of things that I could ask, “Do you think this is rude?” But then I realize we’re all just people trying to survive in a very crazed, mixed-up world, and that most people don’t mean harm or offense.
As I grow older, I try to ask more often: “What is his/her good intention,” rather than “How did he/she offend me?” I don’t think I’m such an offensive person that the first response someone would have toward me is to be rude.
Then again, I may be wrong. I’ll ask my higher power.
Woman here, and I think it’s rude if it goes beyond the “hi, bye” interaction you describe. Emily Post and her ilk agree.
There’s some gray area in there, but not much.
Funny, I always thought men were more socially inept about these sorts of things.
Meh. I can easily see wanting to say something quick, or just say hello, and have it blow into a conversation. Intending to avoid a longer interruption of introductions with a quick exchange, and having it go longer than anticipated. Regardless, we don’t have take-a-number service in social situations and interruptions of this sort are part-and-parcel of being in public.
The person who bears the most responsibility is the one who knows both parties. Suppose I’m chatting w/ Plan B and QuickSilver approaches and says hello. I should introduce Plan B and QuickSilver and bring both into the conversation. If I cannot remember QuickSilver’s name, then I say to QuickSilver, “Do you know Plan B?” That’s QuickSilver’s cue to introduce himself because I’ve forgotten his name.
Bummer that I missed this first time through. You are confusing me because your opening sentence speaks of the Socratic dialog as being something everyone should be able to grasp, and finish by saying that it is an unrealistic ideal.
Regardless, as for being a cultural thing: When I was at summer ski camp in high school, my cabinmates would talk all over one another. There was no give & take, no listening to the other persons’ remarks before responding. Finally I couldn’t take it any more and expressed my frustration. They looked at me like I was from outer space. “We’re Jewish,” they said, “That’s how Jewish people talk.” Fair enough.
[/hijack]
Well, I deliberately left out a comma between “two people” and “who” so that it would be a restrictive clause:
just meanig to say that it’s somewhat arrogant to feel that no one should speak while you’re speaking in a casual social setting, and that everyone should wait until you’ve finished your brilliant point and that when someone overlaps with you they are somehow violating your devine oration.
I wasn’t really that concerned that people should grasp the Socratic dialog; I just meant to say it’s not what to expect at most dinner parties.
Well, you live and learn. Great story!
js_africanus-your summer camp people sound like my family. Never thought about it being a Jewish thing (my mother is 1/2 Jewish) just a bonkers, loud, loving family thing. We tend to intimidate guests until they get used to it.
Regardless, if you need to interrupt you say “I’m so sorry to interrupt you X, but I should only need a moment”. At which point you turn to Y and say either, “I don’t think we’ve met, I’m Z, please excuse my rudeness but I’ll only take a second of X’s time” or “Thanks for being so understanding Y, I’ll just be a moment”.
Just butting in and dragging someone off when they’re having a conversation with someone is inexcusable.
Butting into conversations however is at the core of most social gatherings, and is perfectly acceptable as long as you involve all parties, and it’s obvious that the people aren’t discussing something private. “I couldn’t help overhearing…” is a great opener.
I’m a woman, and I think it’s pretty clueless, with a side helping of rude. It’s normal manners to excuse yourself when you enter a conversation already in progress.
Well, I can’t say that I agree w/ that characterization of a give-and-take conversation, even in a social setting. After all, if I’m talking w/ someone it’s because I’d like to hear what she has to say.
A similar thing that bugs me is when I’m with a friend and we run into one of their friends, they start talking to them, without introducing or acknowledging me, and it’s like I’m not there anymore. That pisses me off!
Damn, the things people consider to be rude. So the person who comes up to your desk and quietly waits for you to finish up with whatever your doing and acknowledge them is being passive-aggressive? I hope I never find myself working with you, because that’s what I do. Where I come from, it’s called being polite.
Anyhoo, I think that the whole “person C comes up to person A, who is talking with person B, and starts talking with them, and both of them completely ignore person B” is beyond rude. It’s downright mean.
Damn, the things people consider to be polite. As I said, in such a situation your very presence is an interruption: what makes you think that you’re being polite by just standing there and hovering instead of acknowledging that you’ve interrupted? Damn straight that’s passive-aggressive! Either speak up or go away.
And what kind of place do you work in where people are likely to finish whatever they’re doing within a few minutes? Just this morning, I spent 20-25 minutes editing a slide presentation: if you had come up to my desk when I’d just started, would you really expect to just stand there quietly for almost half an hour?
Do us both a favor: if you ever find yourself considering a job opening at a small software company in northern Virginia, “just say no.” 
Social situations themselves may be divided into more formal social situations, where for example your boss is present, or clients, or other important people, and less formal social situations, such as a 40th birthday bash.
In the latter, the environment (the music, the booze, the ambience) may enable, even encourage butting in. (And it should be noted that interruption isn’t a unitary phenomenon - only some types of interruption are related to variables which reflect dominance). In the former, the power aspect is an important factor. Powerful people tend to interrupt more, and their interruptions tend to be excused more by participants (especially the one who will become the powerful person’s interlocutor - and that role may change of course over different occasions, or over different speech events on the same occasion). Indeed, that interlocutor, as well as the powerful person, would probably not consider the change in speaking arrangements to be an interruption (i.e interactionally deviant) at all. BUT, if it happened to them…
Well, if anything at all can be certainly gleaned from this thread is that “context is everything.”
In fact, at the risk of annoying everyone, I’ll repeat it: “Context is everything.”
Even again: “Context is everything.”
One other note: I’ve noticed that as I’ve moved up in my hierarchical position in my work, people tend to proffer me more observance. But I don’t really care for observance. If I’m working on some computer-type thing, an exalted Power Point presentation (the modern form of a slide-slow presentation or OHP which accomplishes basically the same thing), I do not consider the job so particularly technical in the computer sense that a well-meaning and polite co-worker can’t come in and politely mention some idea that might improve it. The software has pre-empted the effectiveness of the ideas. Bureaucratic fools are impressed by the animations of Power Point, but it doesn’t necessarily make the idea any better. They’re just kids with new toys. You can work all night on your fancy Power Point presentation; that doesn’t mean that it means a hill of beans.
Don’t get me wrong. I’ll use any software to make a good point. But I won’t scoff at someone who is simply trying to be polite by not butting in; especially if that person might have something really helpful to add. And if you’re so important in your job that you can’t even recognize someone standing nearby without considering it an “interruption,” you certainly have a very high consideration of yourself. I can’t imagine working on any Power Point presentation which is so important that you would never even consider the presence of another human being. But, on the other hand, I wouldn’t consider such behavior so unusual considering how office conditions are; office environments and the attitudes they produce often lead to such condescending attitudes. (“How dare you stand around me while I’m doing such an important thing. You can’t have anything important to add to my project, and why should I bother to recognize you? You have to excuse yourself for being in my presence. Then maybe I’ll consider your existance. After all, we’re not working here to accomplish anything in particular; we’re here to show who are the most important people.”)
Maybe I’m wrong, but I happen to believe that you can work in an office and also be a decent human being at the same time.
I suggest we all re-watch “Betty la fea.”