Commun 101: Introduction to Interpersonal Communication
Analysis Paper № 2: Relational Dialectics.
Zoyirov Otabek
Relational dialectics is a communication theory. The theory could be interpreted as “a knot of contradictions in personal relationships or an unceasing interplay between contrary or opposing tendencies.” The theory, first proposed respectively by Leslie Baxter and W. K. Rawlins in 1988, defines communication patterns between relationship partners as the result of endemic dialecticaltensions. In their description of Relational Dialectics, Leslie A. Baxter and Barbara M. Montgomery simplify the concept by posing “opposites attract”, but “birds of a feather flock together”. Also, “Two’s company; three’s a crowd” but “the more the merrier.” These contradictions experienced within common folk proverbs are similar to those we experience within our relationships as individuals. When making decisions, we give voice to multiple viewpoints and desires that often contradict each other. The Relational Dialectic is an elaboration on Mikhail Bakhtin’s idea that life is an open monologue and humans experience collisions between opposing desires and needs within relational communications.[7] Baxter includes a list of Dialectical Tensions that reminds us that relationships are constantly changing, and that successful and satisfying relationships require constant attention. Although Baxter’s description of Relational Dialectics is thorough, it by no means is exact or all inclusive since we all experience different tensions in different ways.
Relational dialectics is an interpersonal communication theory that emphasizes the tensions, struggles, and interplay between opposing tendencies in close personal bonds and relationships. Now I am going to analyze and tell about the development of close relationship that I had.
Actually, I am going to analyze the development of close friendship. When I studied in an academic lyceum at the beginning I had no friends. But by the time I got on well with one of my group mates. His name is Ali. At that time we both were learning English and Math and we needed help of each other. The first tension is openness vs protection, openness defined as being attentive and responsive. The facts that we were attentive and responsive to each other, we talked about different themes and shared our thoughts and feelings can define openness. Hardly ever we can find someone who has no secret and distance from others. So we had such a distance. And I think it is normal. Keeping some secrets from personal life and having some distance is inevitable. And these can define protection. We used to spend a lot of time together and we knew each other very well, but anyway we had some free place there in our life where we could be just free. Despite the fact that now we are living and studying in different countries we still have that friendship bonds, and openness vs protection still does exist as I think. One of the main reasons why actually we got on well and why we become such close friends is that we had a lot in common, we had the same interests and our point of view were close. And this caused our relationship and after we knew each other more and more it caused the openness.
In conclusion, relational dialectics can be defined as “conflicts between two important but opposing needs or desires”. These conflicts are considered normal, natural, and even unavoidable in our personal relationships. The usefulness of Relational Dialectics theory is undeniable, both in the communication studies field and in everyday life. While it can’t explain everything, it’s still an extremely useful tool. In my case, this could adequately characterize the development and maintenance of my relationship, as I could explain what and how everything happened. I guess this theory might characterize the development/maintenance of most types of relationship for most people of the time. The clear reason for that is that it covers many aspects and for this reason it can define the tensions. But as there could be any other different situations in some cases theory might not characterize the development/ maintenance of relationship as it is needed.
