Relational Dialectics

             Over the course the semester we had the chance to do a communication analysis. This was where we were to look at an object and use a communication theory of our choosing, and use that theory to see something we wouldn’t see in that object without it. The theory I decided to go with was Relational Dialectics. Relational dialectics theory states that all personal relationships are always in flux. This statement suggest that in all relationship we have with others, there will always be this constant tug and pull of opposing views between the two in the relationship; and most importantly that it is normal. There are three dialectics in this theory: integration/separation, stability/change, and expression/nonexpression. Within each of these dialectics there are internal and external constraints; internal constraints have to do with the two people in the relationship in regards to how they feel, while external constraints are between the two in the relationship and everyone else in their outside community. Each of the two constraints also has two conflicting views that the members in the relationship may feel going through each phase. (Griffin, 2012)

            Now the first dialectic is integration and separation. When it comes to romantic relationships we’ve all been in or heard the “I need space” or “We don’t spend time together” arguments. This is where the first dialectic can help us look at these types of arguments and scenarios. Usually in a relationship when the issue of space comes up one partner feels that they need space away from the other, while the other partner may feel they don’t spend enough time together at all. Now the partner that feels that they need space is going through the separation phase of this dialectic. Separation is the feeling one gets in a personal relationship when they want to separate or exclude themselves from the relationship. Then on the other end of this dialectic there’s integration; this is the feeling of wanting to be more unified in the relationship, what the other partner was feeling. How I tend to look at it is somewhat of a “me vs. we” battle personal relationships go through. Now when it comes to the internal constraints for this dialect there’s connection and autonomy. Connection has to do with wanting the other member to “come here” are be more unified, while autonomy is the “go away” feeling one gets, or the feeling of not wanting to be so unified with the other person at this point (Baxter, 2004). The external constraints for this dialect are inclusion and seclusion; inclusion is when the two in the relationship take into consideration everyone else’s time with them, while seclusion is the time spent just with themselves or in other words “we time”.

            The next dialectic this theory talks about is stability and change, something very important when it comes to romantic relationships. Now each part of this dialectic kind of speaks for itself. When it comes to personal relationships this theory simply states that in a relationship one person, and at certain time or point, will want things to be stable, while the other wants a little spontaneity, and vice versa. For example, it’s like if you were to always take your significant other out to eat at his or her favorite restaurant. For some time it may be cute and thoughtful, but at some point it may get boring to them and they may want to try something different. The internal constraints for this dialectic are certainty and uncertainty, this just means that between the two in the relationship there’s a want for things to be routine when it comes to certainty, and a little spontaneous in regards to uncertainty. However, the external constraints for this dialect are conventional and uniqueness. Conventional relates to how the two in the relationship want to blend in with others, or be normal; while uniqueness is the desire to standout amongst everyone outside of the relationship. (Griffin, 2012)

            The final dialectic in this theory is expression and nonexpression. In this dialectic expression is when one person in the relationship is comfortable or able to express themselves; while nonexpression is simply when the other doesn’t express themselves enough, and these are where issues can erupt and occur (Baxter, 2004). In many romantic relationships there is usually one partner that is more open than the other in many ways. It can go from emotional feelings to personal experiences, not everyone is willing to be as open as the person they're in a relationship with. I feel this dialectic is trying to convey that in our personal relationships there will be times “walls are built” between people, and times we open up a part of ourselves to people that we normally wouldn’t share. When it comes to the internal and external constraints for this dialect there is: openness and closeness, and inclusion and seclusion. Openness is when we can share everything with the person we are in a relationship with, while closeness is not sharing everything with that person; both of these are internal constraints. The external constraints are inclusion in which we share things in the relationship with others, and seclusion where things are kept for others outside of the relationship.

            See, in conclusion, this theory gives us the opportunity to look at these episodes people may go through being in a romantic relationships in another light. Without relational dialectics these scenarios look like issues or problems that can be detrimental to the relationship. What this theory is in turn trying to say is that it’s always a constant struggle to balance the two opposing ideas in each dialectic. But not only are we constantly trying to balance the two, this struggle is a part of being in personal relationships. The theory gives us a chance to take a step back and understand that these are the dynamics of the personal relationships we take part in on a daily basis. That’s what beautiful about applying theories to communication; they let us look at the way we communicate to help better understand why we do the things we do, how they affect those around us, and how to better the way we communicate with each other in certain circumstances.