Relational Development and Office Space

Relational Development is a funny thing, and so is the 1999 film, Office Space. Why are these two topics humorous? Well, each have numerous reasons why they are funny:

Relational Development is funny because:

• it’s an intuitive theory about the way we talk to each other.
• by its nature of being intuitive and not fact based, it is kind of limiting.
• it shows up all across our lives, especially within the media

Office Space is funny because:

• it was written and directed by Mike Judge, the creator of King of the Hill.
• it features a hypnotherapy session gone bad.
• Jennifer Aniston actually does a great job, and that’s just unexpected.

Now that we know why both of these are funny, let’s talk about them more.

         

Relational Development

          The developer of the Relational Development model, Knapp, observed lots of relationships of all sorts, and then decided that there were certain aspects of the way that each relationship developed that stood consistent throughout each relationship.

For example, whenever you go out on a date for the first time, there is a sort of expected procedure you will probably follow in order to get a positive reaction from the other person: “Hi. I’m Chris. I am in school. I like to go to the zoo.”

          And there tended to be expected procedures not only just at the beginning of the relationship, but all throughout it. “Our trip to the zoo was a bust, so I’m breaking up with you. I can’t believe you don’t like giraffes.” (Note: there really is NO reason NOT to like giraffes. Have you ever seen them fight?)

            Basically, Knapp broke down all of these different tendencies into ten different stages that fit into Initiating, Together, or Coming Apart. These three groups kind of overlap sometimes (see: speed dating), but for the most part, the stages fit pretty well together. (Griffin 111-12)

Office Space

Office Space is about Peter, an average guy who is unhappy with his job. Through some strange coincidences, he ends up in a hypnotherapy session with his cheating girlfriend, and right after the therapist gets him into a deep stage of relaxation, the therapist dies of a heart attack, leaving Peter in his deeply relaxed state. From there, he decides to ask out the waitress he’s had a crush on forever, he quits going to work, and he just quits giving a damn altogether. Eventually, he gets promoted at work, and his friends are set to get fired–even though it’s Peter who isn’t going to work. In order to get back at the company, Peter convinces his friends to implement a virus that would rip off the company big time, but because of the nature of the virus, they won’t get caught. Or so they think. Everything goes wrong, and it’s just silly. Well worth the watch.

On the surface, these two topics don’t seem to go together very well. With a little knowledge about the film, however, they work extremely well together. One of the major ways that Judge gets laughs throughout the film is by recognizing and poking fun at the ways we initiate conversation; if, according to Relational Development, we keep doing it the same way, over and over, doesn’t it just get funny after a while?

Additionally, many relationships come to an end. Peter’s waitress girlfriend also hates her job, and she decides to quit. As part of her exit, she flips the bird to her coworkers, her boss, and the customers: classic Relational Development tendency for terminating a relationship (not specifically mentioned by Knapp, but my intuition tells me so. For the record, I can’t blame her. This is what she has to put up with every day:

And in this way, Mike Judge makes Relational Development a funny thing. It’s very possible that even after I described Relational Development, you didn’t see why it’s funny; now, hopefully, you do. It’s the reason why we keep running into the same relationship problems. It’s the reason that things get stale. It’s the reason we laugh at poor Peter’s problems.

Also, this:

Works Cited
Griffin, Emory A. A First Look at Communication Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012. Print.