The Dance Of Life
Edward T. Hall | The Labyrinth Of Time | Related Reading
It can now be said with assurance that individuals are dominated in their behavior by complex hierarchies of interlocking rhythms. Furthermore, these same interlocking rhythms are compatible to fundamental themes in a symphonic score, a keystone in the interpersonal processes between mates, co-workers, and organizations of all types on the interpersonal level within as well as across cultural boundaries. I am convinced that it will ultimately be proved that almost every facet of human behavior is involved in the rhythmic process.
| Edward T. Hall, The Dance of Life: The Other Dimension of Time
The Labyrinth of Time
Edward T. Hall, perhaps best known for The Silent Language, his examination of explicit and informal forms of communication, offered up the quote above, which I encountered in a labyrinthine way.
I was following the arguments of several writers about another, somewhat related, concept of Hall’s: the distinction between two endpoints on a critical human characteristic. Hall maintained that people naturally (or culturally) fall into either ‘monochronic’ thinking, where one thing is done at a time, or ‘polychronic’ thinking, where time is seen as more fluid, and many things may be undertaken in the same time frame.
Wikipedia defines monochronic time like this:
A monochronic time system means that things are done one at a time and time is segmented into small precise units. Under this system, time is scheduled, arranged, and managed.
The United States considers itself a monochronic society. This perception came about during the Industrial Revolution. Many Americans think of time as a precious resource not to be wasted or taken lightly. As communication scholar Edward T. Hall wrote regarding the Americans' viewpoint of time in the business world, "the schedule is sacred." Hall says that for monochronic cultures, such as the American culture, "time is tangible" and viewed as a commodity where "time is money" or "time is wasted." John Ivers, a professor of cultural paradigms, agrees with Edward Hall by stating, "In the market sense, monochronic people consume time." The result of this perspective is that monochronic cultures place a paramount value on schedules, tasks, and "getting the job done”.
Monochronic time orientation is very prominent in core Germanic-speaking countries, Finland, France, Japan and the "Asian economic tigers".
Another way to say this is that in monochronic societies, time is commodified: workers are paid for their labor hours, and therefore, businesses want them to do exactly what is needed, at each moment they are on the job.
And polychronic time?
A polychronic time system means several things can be done at once. In polychronic time systems, a wider view of time is exhibited, and time is perceived in large fluid sections.
Examples of polychronic cultures are Latin American, African, Arab, South Asian, Mediterranean, and Native American cultures. These cultures' view on time can be connected to "natural rhythms, the earth, and the seasons". These analogies can be understood and compared because natural events can occur spontaneously and sporadically, like polychronic-time-oriented people and polychronic-time-oriented cultures.
[…]
Polychronic cultures are much less focused on the preciseness of accounting for time and more on tradition and relationships rather than on tasks. Polychronic societies have no problem being late for an appointment if they are deeply focused on some work or in a meeting that ran past schedule, because the concept of time is fluid and can easily expand or contract as need be. As a result, polychronic cultures have a much less formal perception of time. They are not ruled by precise calendars and schedules.
And, of course, the way we experience time and our relation to it — and our relations to each other through it — are shaped by our time orientation.
Other thinkers have made related observations about the human experience of time. For example, Sarah Jaffe’s analysis of Jenny O’Dell’s search for a new kind of time explored O’Dell’s terms ‘chronos’ time and ‘kairos’ time:
In her new book, Saving Time, Jenny Odell introduces the concept of kairos time to differentiate it from “chronos,” the kind of time we usually live by. Chronos time is capitalist time: the employee time clock, the relentless pace of work, the “you have the same 24 hours in a day as Beyoncé” memes urging productivity. “Kairos,” Odell writes, “means something more like ‘crisis,’” and it is marked by a feeling of uncertainty, a feeling that time itself is passing in a different way, but also a time that is more hopeful. It is the time in which change—transformation—becomes possible. It is the time in which we become the creators of our own world.
In a post from February, inspired by O’Dell’s search, I wrote:
These terms are also employed by Enuma Okoro, who lays out chronos as clock time, time flattened by machines, while kairos is seasonal time, the rich understanding of time emerging from natural cycles, like day and night, the seasons of the year, the ebb and flow of our blood and brains. As Okoro puts it, we tend to think of chronos time
as something that works against us, rather than for us, an element of life that takes rather than gives. Days marked only by chronos time bind us in ways that can feel restrictive, demanding and consuming.
Chronos takes, while kairos gives.
And that differentiation between monochronic chronos time and polychronic kairos time lies at the heart of an essay I read this week. In Why the French Don’t Obsess Over Purpose, Pamela Clapp makes the case that French culture is much less inclined to obsess over work as a source of purpose than Americans:
I don’t think most French people think about purpose the way Americans do.
What’s your purpose? What are you building? What are you here for?
They’re good questions. But in France, they’re not humming in the background of every conversation. Most people I know don’t define themselves by what they do for a living. And if they work in a corporate setting, there’s often this quiet trust that things will evolve over time. No need to panic about your life path. Just do your job — and enjoy your life.
[…]
In the U.S., the idea of *having purpose* is everywhere: in books, on podcasts, in LinkedIn bios, even in casual brunch conversations. There’s this constant pressure to align your job with your passion, your calendar with your goals, your time with your values.
But what if your purpose is simply to build a good life? To raise kind children. To cook a little better each year. To read a few excellent books. To notice the seasons. To build meaningful relationships. To help others. To give time - and money if you can - to causes you care about.
Isn’t that what people will remember anyway?
The French, apparently, fall on the polychronic kairos end of time experience; Americans, the other end.
In Decommodified Time, I cited Laura Vanderkam,
Do we need to fully unplug in order to relax? I hope we can begin to understand that, for many, work is a collection of tasks, not a collection of hours in a certain place. And time is a finite resource, but one that cannot always be neatly divided into “work time” and “free time.” Taking time for yourself during the work day doesn’t make you lazy, and working a bit on vacation doesn’t make you a workaholic. Dispensing with strict time boundaries should also mean ditching the guilt you might feel for either.
And I agreed with her:
I agree with the underlying trend: work is a collection of tasks, not a collection of hours. We should all share the incentive of accomplishing the tasks, not watching the hours burn down. Yes, tasks ‘take time’, and likewise, taking a walk ‘takes time’, but they aren’t the same ‘times’. We should resist commoditizing time, and acting as if all time is unitary, waiting to be used for work.
Tasks are part of linear, chronos time, and they can intrude into and dismantle life-renewing kairos time if we aren’t careful.
We can be time-sliced to the point where we are hammered flat, and miss all the inflection points leading outside chronos, and into a deeper realm over all horizons.
Edward T. Hall made a sweeping argument, in the quotation at the top of this piece, that human societies are shaped by ‘complex hierarchies of interlocking rhythms’. The cadence of work, the transition in and out of free-flowing polychronic kairos time and back into monochronic chronos time… these modalities and the frequency and depth of our transitions define the rhythms of life. Our ability to work together is underpinned by these ‘interpersonal processes between mates, co-workers, and organizations of all types’.
Becoming more aware of these tempos and our native inclination to operate in the sort of time that best suits us — culturally and individually — provides us a way to find our own way to dance through time and not be hammered flat or commodified by it.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to workfutures.io to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.