"Really?" I replied. "Interesting. I just wear it because I like it." It was a nice icebreaker that morning as I went in for a tire. And there was only one thing wrong with it. Chief Wahoo is not named after Crawford. He is simply a logo for the Cleveland baseball team, and I knew that.
So, why not correct him? I would rather ask, why correct him? What purpose would that serve?
All right, in not correcting the guy I was patronizing him. Yet I don't see what's wrong with patronization in such a context. He was only making conversation, and I didn't see why I should stick a pin in that. When dealing with innocuous items like the exact nature of a baseball symbol, let him have his fun. There's just no harm done.
Sure, I would kindly correct a friend or family member. But that's a little different; a new angle has been added. Why would I want to allow friends and family to be put in a potentially embarrassing situation of being called out by a stranger on an unimportant point? This guy was only my tire guy. I conversely did not want to embarrass him, so I let it go without censure.
In short, I see no evil in patronizing someone if the circumstances, I will say, merit it. There's no reason to be a know it all, and no reason to burst bubbles, with small talk. Only just don't patronize me by saying you agree with this if you don't.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment