Conversation vs. Mutual Monologues (Edited)

A friend sent me this quote today:

"There is no such thing as conversation. It is an illusion. There are intersecting monologues, that's all." --Rebecca West

And I replied:

Hmm. How is she defining "conversation"?

I have noticed that frequently, people (including myself, sometimes) are just waiting for a pause in the wordstream so they can get their own piece said.

Then there's the other kind of conversation (in which I hope I engage more frequently than not), in which the parties not talking actually listen.

But, hmm, what is conversation other than intersecting (and interesting, I hope) monologue? You have something to say, and I'm interested in hearing it. Or are we just being polite? I think that if the monologue changes direction based on conversational input, then conversation is more than just intersecting monologue. [Darn, I hate it when I leave out words that fundamentally change the meanings of sentences.]

Maybe debate counts as conversation, which is a tad more combative but which also has the possibility of changing thoughts. Maybe "conversational debate" or "debating conversation" is the optimum, in which people are mutually respectful, both of each other and each others' theses, but we stake out opinions for the purposes of chewing on them and possibly changing our positions.

Hmm. Blog topic, methinks. :)

Blogging could be conversation, I think, if I could figure out how to get dialog going. I really wish I could restrict my blog searching to local folk, I think there's something to be said for physical proximity (the possibility of meeting, for one).

That is a challenging quote. Maybe it's not the put-down it sounds like (I frequently say things that aren't put-downs but sound like put-downs).