Crossed Signals

saratoga wrote about "context" in his most recent post. In this real-time Turkish bazaar of ideas, people are constantly opining, replying, dashing off compliments and bombs and every manner of verbal expression at a dizzying pace. Signals routinely get crossed; I'm haggling over the price of the brass elephant, but you're extolling the virtues of the Taj Mahal snow-gobe.

One would think that in real life it would be easier. But life, much as My cell phone company would like to disagree in their promos, is still basically "analog" when it comes to person on person.

So while the number of signals in real life can be less than here in networld, the richness (i. e., complexity) of them is proportionally greater. Thus the opportunities for crossed signals are just as great, and unfortunately, the implications are more serious since the stakes are generally much higher.

And in D/s, which in previous posts I've called a magnifying glass, the stakes are high indeed.

Both in saratoga's post (and in freya's reply to a post of Mine) an important idea is touched upon. Namely, that while we all somehow expect and understand that the submissive does not go into things fully formed, we often don't allow for the possibility that the Dom/me, as well, doesn't necessarily have everything figured out ahead of time.

This is a tricky area. The question naturally arises, "well, why should i submit to someone if they don't have it all figured out?" And it's a reasonable question, if we're talking about true submission, i. e., surrender. What the submissive gives up is real and valuable. Part of the joy of submission is the quiet constant certainty that the driver knows the way, as it were. Conversely, there is a haunting but very real feeling of dread that's created when one feels as though the driver really doesn't know the way, or even the destination.

The answer to Me lies in understanding that the Dominant should have a strategy. What the Dom/me will not necessarily have at every moment is the exact tactical steps that will be taken to achieve said strategy. It's a crucial difference. I call this the "process and details" thing. The Dom/me has a process. S/he articulates it, or parts of it, in line with His or Her wishes and the bent of His or Ner nature. But in any case the process is firmly fixed in mind. It is essentially immutable, since it expresses what the Dom/me wants, in some "ultimate" way. It is the refined vision of His or Her dominance, of what S/He wants in a submissive.

The details though are subject to adjustment based on a large number of variables. The good Dom/me is flexible, knowing that flexibiliy is stregnth, not weakness. There are always many ways to advance the process. At times, even the best Dom/me will have to try several or many different things until something works. S/he must be prepared to sometimes explain this, to admit mistakes, etc. It's tedious, often boring, sometimes even painful. But necessary.

The point being that while the submissive should expect his or her Owner to know the destination, s/he shouldn't expect Him or Her to know the name, population, and founding date of every little town on the route.

Once again, it's lame and boring to say, but it's true: More communication means less crossed signals.