“You look like Leena Chandavarkar”, she said to her. It was one woman complimenting the other on her looks. And, as I had noticed, she put quite an effort on her smart phone internet browser to track down the actress she was referring to, for she was not able to recall her name initially. There was an earnestness in her effort; the discovery was somehow important to her. If it was due to the delight of discovery itself, or to seriously compliment the other lady (her friend!), I couldn’t say with certainty, though suspected that it was the first. I too had a look at the picture of the actress and strained my eyes to discover the resemblance, which, if at all there, mostly eluded me; it was, at best, even with liberal use of my imagination, extremely marginal, and generic in nature. Irrespective of that the recipient of the compliment seemed pleased. So, the purpose was served. Something in the compliment seemed odd to me, though. Neither the compliment was out of place for the person being praised, she indeed is a beauty of some merit with very amicable facial features and worthy, nor the exaggeration of comparison, for that is the nature of a compliment, aberration, as I discovered in that moment, was in use of the reference point- a film star!.
It was a cliched compliment; coming from imagination which was not sufficiently aroused. Awoken only by a weak stimulus (woman to woman!), which did not really set imagination of giver on fire to find the highest of similes, instead it went for most easily available one. And safest too, as comparison with a Bollywood heroine comes with lightest of burdens on the recipient - for, it is merely a description of a state of being without onus of an action, just to keep looking like as one already does. Also, it was delivered more like a pleasantry; where the overtness of expression was more important than the content of it. I would tend to believe that genuineness of compliment leads to the choice of subtler form of expression. A well heard compliment is exactly for that- ears.
If we leave aside its usage in deliberate politeness of acceptable social behaviour which treads on the grey area between truth and lies, a true complement stems from admiration which is very personal in nature. It operates purely on emotional level. Any chosen form of expression adulterates it with own deformity- in form of limitations of medium to transmit it with its full emotional content. Hence the propensity to go for subtlest of expression. Eyes top the list. Eyes are glass windows to the sealed chamber of purest emotions, where the outside air has not touched and discoloured them. Anything visible in that glass is pristine. No other form of expression compares, including poetry, in its expressive intensity, with smitten look in the eyes of lover for beloved. And, even layman can read it in those eyes. All stronger forms of expression of a complement are meta verbal; relegating the verbal expression to the bottom of the list. To preserve the emotional impact of a complement against these deformities its content has to be bolstered, like hyperboles in poetry- i.e. lies, hampering its genuineness. And, in that sense even the most smitten poetry is peppered with lies.
On the other hand, social complimenting is tricky business as it operates on a spectrum carrying infinite variations of form linked to endless degrees of subtle to overt. The choice of form is dependent on the purpose of compliment and the genuineness backing it. In majority of situations though purpose it self dictates the genuineness of the compliment, it also depends on the perceived intelligence level of recipient to see through the fallaciousness. This trickiness makes complimenting more of an art than science, and a breeding ground of artful, who have gladly turned it into a weapon, for which few have developed a defence and are waylaid by it on day-today basis.
In social utility of a compliment, a closely weighed complement by giver leaves recipient wanting for more and loses its value significantly. For its proper effect to take place it must build an allowance on the overstating side. Under the influence of inflated self perception, every man’s disease, a closely weighed complement will fall short of expectation of the recipient. Here truth and credibility are linked with a factor which is equal to the factor of inflated self perception, and recipient is happy to offer higher than appropriate credibility to the giver in order to believe in exaggerated complement to that extent. The only situation in which recipient will critically analyse the complement and will tend to discount it is when an agenda is perceived behind it. Powerful people receive complements with much higher frequency and discount them for the same reason. But, surprisingly, they do miss them if frequency reduces; complements are a measurement of power, and a reduction signifies loss of power to them.
-Pulastya
No comments:
Post a Comment