What Is Idle Talk?

Idle chatter is that talk which is not directed toward some good end either by habitual intention or actual deliberation and which does not take into appropriate account duty, time (occasions or actual time), place (location or status), and other circumstances (such as remaining recollected or maintaining appropriate boundaries), which make communication most effective and proper.

Cf. Germain Grisez, The Way of the Lord Jesus, vol. 2, ch. 7, q. B, 1.e.

A good end is always determined by love of God and love of neighbor, either individually or communally. This love of neighbor, whether individually or communally, may manifest itself in the desire to foster peaceful relations or just relations; to aid the poor, suffering, or neglected by attending to them with words of comfort or conversation; to respect our superiors or those in offices of honor or power, such as a judge, an officer, or our boss; etc.

Time, place, and circumstances with respect to 1) our duties and responsibilities; 2) our recollection in God; 3) our appropriate boundaries. 

1) With respect to duties, making sure that our conversation will not make us negligent in our duties in any way; making sure that our conversation doesn't lead us to escape burdens, commitments, conflicts that must be resolved or faced. Such conversation often imposes on others.

2) With respect to recollection, making sure our conversation doesn't draw us away from God and immerse us totally or even predominantly in creaturely things unless these are subordinated and directed to God habitually or actually. Such conversation affords many occasions of sins.

3) With respect to maintaining appropriate boundaries, making sure our conversation would not put us in danger of blurring physical, emotional, and spiritual boundaries that keep us safe and out of occasions of sin. Such conversation is also respectful of others' duties and responsibilities.

Scripture speaks of right language as edifying (Eph. 4:29), as calm, joyful, gentle, honest and upright (Col 3:8), pure, moral, dignified, mature, in its proper place, and grateful (Eph. 5:4), directed towards the supernatural, non-argumentative (1 Tim. 6:20b-21), sensitive, considerate, patient, fraternally correcting when necessary (2 Tim. 2:14-17, 23-26), careful, and coming from the depths of our hearts (Mt. 12:34b-37).

Lionel Bailly: How the Subject Interacts with the Other

The Other is omnipresent: all our lives we will play with, struggle against, and learn to use its manifestations. Verbal jokes are directed at the Other—they seek to subvert the Other by slyly playing with the boundaries of obscenity, social acceptability, or with the rules of language itself [e.g. puns]. A person who bumps against a piece of furniture and automatically says, 'sorry' is addressing the Other; a person who is habitually late may be rebelling against the Other in its guise as Time; the Other is in money: the miser and the gambler are both trying to bend it to their will. But in psychoanalysis, it is the Other as language that is the most important, because of the structuring effect that language has upon the development of the Subject, and because the truth of the Subject can only be apprehended by means of it.

---

Source: Lionel Bailly, Lacan (Oxford, England: Oneworld Publications, 2009), 73.

Lionel Bailly: The Subject is Revealed in the Other

For Lacan, the Subject remained that elusive thing that hides behind the ego [our conscious self-identity as we would describe it], that is alienated from it, that is created in an act of language, and that is largely unconscious. It is the Subject that speaks; but when it speaks, it barely knows what it is saying. And I am no longer referring here to the 'unconscious discourse' that appears in slips of the tongue, dreams, and pathological symptoms, I am referring to what the speaker (Subject) would think of as 'conscious speech'. This is because for the most part, the Subject is unconscious of itself.

This view may seem like overstatement: one feels provoked to say, 'But I do know what I'm talking about ... I only make a slip of the tongue very rarely, 99% of the time I mean exactly what I'm saying', etc. But the experienced analyst knows instantly when she/he hears denegation ('Of course, he's likeable [sic] enough' nearly always means I don't like him); and even the most common, everyday use of language is closely governed by the unconscious. Most of the time, there is an interplay of conscious and unconscious in our speech: we may mean exactly what we say, but we hardly ever know why we say it. Consider the following examples:

'Has so-and-so got a partner?' appears a simple question, but what motivates it? Is the questioner a woman worried that the so-and-so in question is interested in her man? Or is it a man interested in so-and-so? Or is it a woman who, motivated by jealousy, hopes to learn that so-and-so is unlucky in love where she herself is not? Whichever it is, the speaker is bound to deny it, and say it's an innocent question motivated by altruistic concern or curiosity. And even if that were true, then why the altruism/curiosity? We can never escape the unconscious—even when it is harmless.

'We've cooked a roast for you—we got the joint from such-and-such specialist butcher' could provoke guilt in a prodigal child, or encourage a guest to bring a bottle of better quality wine than usual (why not just 'a roast'? Why mention the quality of it?), etc. But again, in both cases, the speaker's intentions are entirely unconscious.

'I'm still recovering from the weekend' is a commonly heard phrase, but why does the speaker think the listener needs to know this? Is she/he boasting about her/his exciting social life, bolstering the edifice of an ego which includes the master signifiers 'socially successful' or 'popular'? Or is she/he trying to convince her/himself that she/he had a good time, when in fact she/he was very bored?

Even 'Please may I have a kilo of potatoes' could be a multi-layered statement: why not simply, 'a kilo of potatoes'—why the time spent on a formula of politesse? Is the questioner trying to show her/his good breeding? Or if, on the contrary, all politesse is dispensed with—then why the rudeness? Might that be a way of establishing higher status over the lowly greengrocer? And is a kilo enough—or is the speaker being mean and not buying enough, or displaying an anxiety about inadequacy and asking for too many?

These trivial examples only underline the power of the unconscious in directing the selection and combination of signifiers into chains with or without our conscious 'will'; Lacan saw this interplay between conscious and unconscious in the Subject as being like the continuum of the surface of a moebius strip.

The Other is manifest not only in language (even though this may be its principal domain), but also in the whole set of hypotheses [i.e. circumstances] that exert their influence upon the Subject. The Law, societal rules, taboos, mores and expectations, and even Time are different faces of the Other. The Other is constituted by the entire symbolic realm of human productions; accessing the Other involves the crossing of the bar...; it also involves the act of alienation described in the Mirror Stage, which situates the Subject within the Other. These processes of alienation and symbolisation [sic] which tie together Subject and Other are the essential basis of human creativity.

---

Source: Lionel Bailly, Lacan (Oxford, England: Oneworld Publications, 2009), 69-71.

St. Ambrose on Being an Example of Modesty

"Let your moderation be known to all men [Phil. 4:5]. That is to say, your holiness of life must be evident, not only in the sight of God, but also in the sight of men. It must give an example of moderation and self-control to all your contemporaries on earth and serve also as a memorial of goodness before God and men."

---

Source: St. Ambrose, Office of Readings for Friday of the Twenty-Sixth Week in Ordinary Time.

Sacred Scripture on Good and Bad Language

"But now you must put them all away: anger, fury, malice, slander, and obscene language out of your mouths" (Colossians 3:8).

“No foul language should come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for needed edification, that it may impart grace to those who hear” (Ephesians 4:29).

“Immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be mentioned among you, as is fitting among holy ones, no obscenity or silly or suggestive talk, which is out of place, but instead, thanksgiving” (Ephesians 5:4).

Sacred Scripture on Idle Words and Argumentativeness

“Avoid the profane chatter and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge; by professing it some have missed the mark as regards the faith” (1 Tim. 6:20b-21).

“Remind them of this, and warn them before God that they are to avoid wrangling over words, which does no good but only ruins those who are listening. Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved by him, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly explaining the word of truth. Avoid profane chatter, for it will lead people into more and more impiety, and their talk will spread like gangrene. [...] Have nothing to do with stupid and senseless controversies; you know that they breed quarrels. And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kindly to everyone, an apt teacher, patient, correcting opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant that they will repent and come to know the truth, and that they may escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will” (2 Tim. 2:14-17, 23-26).

Our Lord says, “How can you speak good things, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good person brings good things out of a good treasure, and the evil person brings evil things out of an evil treasure. I tell you, on the day of judgment you will have to give an account for every careless word you utter; for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned” (Mt. 12:34b-37).

The Importance of Well-Spent Time

How were some of the saints so perfect and contemplative? They strove to subordinate all their earthly desires to heavenly ones, and by doing so they could cling to God from the very depths of their hearts and freely attend to him [. . . .] If we were not so absorbed in ourselves and if we were less confused in our own hearts, then we might savor divine things and experience something of heavenly contemplation. The greatest hindrance to our spiritual development—indeed, the whole hindrance—is that we allow our passions and desires to control us [. . . .] When we meet the least adversity, we are too quickly dejected and we turn to other people for comfort, instead of to God. 

The present time is very precious. Now are the safe days. Now is the acceptable time. But how sad that you do not spend this time well while you have strength to gather the merit which will allow you to live forever! The time will come when you will wish for one day or one hour for changing your ways, and I do not know whether you will get it [….] Learn now to place Christ at the center of your life, that then you may begin to live your life with Christ. Learn now to let go of all things that stand between you and Christ [….] Do, do now, dear friend, whatever you can do, because you do not know when you will die, nor do you know what will happen to you afterwards. Gather everlasting riches while you have time. Think of nothing except your eternal well-being. Care only for the things of God [….] Keep your heart free and lifted up to God, for this world is not your permanent home.

---

Source: Thomas a Kempis, The Imitation of Christ, 1.11, 23.