The written word is a horrid medium as media go.
The spoken word has the benefits of inflections and, if in person, the communicative black box of body langage and various other unconcious cues. Unfortunately the spoken word rarely allows one time of reflection, nor is one given a chance to develop a thought and quell misunderstanding before ones partner in conversation runs away with some fragment and rends it to bits before you've even finished pinning it into your comments.
What's even worse, especially in this language, is the vast ambiguity in the meanings of so many words. You can have quite an extensive conversation before some turn of phrase reveals that a word you've been using in common has totally different meanings as you are each using it. Conversely you can argue for a good deal before realizing the entire disagreement is semantic... though this is, granted, due more to a desire to argue rather than find common round than to the shortcomings of the language.
No, no... the true horrors of conversation is discovering disagreement where formerly you thought there was understanding. Why horror? you ask? Because it seems that those concepts with the fewest words and the broadest definitions seem also to be the most important. Why should we find ourselves speaking of these vital issues in vague terms with almost no meaning? It is damaging to the concept we try to convey that the words we must use to convey them are so ill suited to transferring the full meaning we try to impart.
For this reason most of what I say to other people is often purey utilitarian. I realize the tool is not suited to the job, and so avoid using it. If I wish to express something unambiguously and it cannot be done with words, I would rather it remain unknown than be mangled in the translation.
Other people do not know this, however.
On the few occassions that I have wandered into the nebulae of ill-fitting but necessary superfluous adjectives people have placed no more importance on what I have said then than at any other time. Which is not surprising. Very little of what I have to say is important. Since I offer no disclaimer, how was she to realize?
But, of course she did. She knew very well that what I was saying was difficult for me to say... unfortunately she could not understand what I was saying. Oh, of course she understood it as if she had said it herself. We have no choice but to supply our own meanings for the words of others. But she is not me and we do not give words the same meanings.
She has dropped these interesting little phrases
"I love you, but I'm not IN love with you"
An interesting phrase, no? Since the most appropriate response that occurs to me upon hearing this phrase is "Why did you lie to me?" I naturally say nothing. I doubt she would agree she lied... no, dear friends, that was just one of those unfortunate occassions where the horrorshow replaced the conversation.
So now, with clear concience, because she attaches no more importance to my use of the word than she does to her own use, she moves on... and I what hope do I have? While she may never understand what was granted to her, she has it all the same. I did not understand what was granted to her. Well, that's not quite true... I understood what it meant, and I believed it when I said it... I did not however truely realize how much I believe it. Actions speak louder than words, they say... and my actions reveal to me that the very heights of my romantic fancy are apparently true. More's the pity to have granted it to someone who refuses to see the place she inhabits.
Ah, but does she? Does she see it and not accept it? Exploit it? Fail to comprehend it? Does it frighten her? Am I not worthy? Does she feel she isn't? Does she realize, in this last case, that it doesn't matter?