"Can't We Talk?" - Deborah Tannen

Tannen's article seems to be written for a popular, general audience as seen from the way she approaches the subject matter - primarily through the use of scenario-based examples which can be easily related to. She then seeks to explain (albeit based on her own opinions and not entirely justified) why the characters acted/reacted the way they did, providing a more informative view on the subject matter.

I liked the article as it made for easy reading, allowing me to easily identify with the examples provided, which were generic and common. I liked how Tannen sought to provide both sides of the argument, explaining why the men and women might have acted in different ways, giving a balanced point of view instead of one which put either sex in the wrong. Furthermore, her writing style is more communicative and engaging, rather than coming across as her authoritative view. This writing style also means that the audience (the readers) feel more connected to her in an 'Aunt Agony' sense, believing that she is writing this article in hope of really helping to bridge communication differences between men and women.

The analogy of Rebecca getting angry over Stuart reading the newspaper particularly interested me. Not only was it an interesting read and a scenario many will be able to imagine and laugh about, Tannen managed to effectively weave in a piece of advice to her audience: to make adjustments and compromise, on the part of both parties. I feel that even though this might seem as common-sense advice to many, seeing it being written in words, even though in an informal sense, does make people ponder more about the issue. As can be seen, despite her background as a scholar, Tannen does not only stick to the abstract theories and analogies, but instead brings the subject matter down to the ground, to her audience - using everyday examples and 'common-sensical' advice to bring across her point - all in simple English.

In fact, Tannen's piece is not just informative (about how miscommunication arises between men and women), her article is styled like a piece of self-help advice, a piece which can easily be found in self-help books which usually employ the use of analogies to help people identify with the 'problem' or scenario, as well as simple, casual language to engage the readers. This, in my opinion is what makes Tannen's piece so engaging, and convincing at the same time, despite the lack of academic seriousness in her writing.

I agree with Tannen, though I feel that she has left out a very important point - contextualizing her examples. The examples and solutions given are generic such that they may be able to appeal to a wider target audience, but in doing so, I find that Tannen also makes the mistake of generalizing her advice and findings, sometimes even to the point of stereotyping. While she does give convincing explanations to the way men and women react in situations of conflict, she fails to qualify these in terms of social background and context - instead making it seem as though her answers were applicable to every person out there.