Relational Prototypes

It is my understanding that relationships are our way of interacting with each other in our daily lives. However, the concept of defining these relationships is not as easy it seemingly is to understand. Our relationships are often characterized by how we behave. Therefore, I would be correct to establish that how we behave when around a particular person is how we relate with that particular person. In truth, a relationship is defined by the things two or more people do when they are in each other’s company. However, there is more to a relationship than how people behave when around one another. In our minds, we carry a version of what that kind of relationship should be and in turn compare it with what we have in reality. That relationship version in our minds is referred to as a prototype relationship.

Two people in a relationship are defined to have different conceptions about each with regard to their prototype relationships. I myself have been in such a situation where I have subjected a close person in a relationship to what I would desire that relationship to appear. Personally, I believe that my relationship with my father is not as exactly as I would want it to be. In description, my father is that kind of person who is ambitious, focused, and always commits himself to what he has set his mind on. I on the other hand have to admit that am a little lazy and would rather have things go the easy way.

Growing up, my father played his part as a parent by imparting to me his values about life. Even though it was the best way he knew how, he was at times harsh on me whenever I went contrary to his expectations. Moreover, he is that type of person who is hard to please. As a result, I grew up fearing my father rather than revering him as a role model and someone whom I would confide with whenever I was in a crucial situation. At one point, I grew so close to my mother than my father. With the way we related, the relationship between my father and I only meant that we grew apart every other day.

However, this was not how I ever wanted to relate with him. In my mind, I pictured a relationship where he and I would be more close than distant. I would have loved him to approve and accept me as I was as I tried to please him. With regard to Wilmot and Baster’s natural language characteristic on relationships, the language label I assigned to my prototype relationship with my father was a free one where we would share more on our daily activities. In terms of criterial attributes, the prototype relationship I had between my father and I was characterized by we would sometimes engage in a bonding activity such as going fishing or washing the car together. I pictured this as an opportunity to bond with my father and may be open up on my personal issues.

Lastly, when I compare the communicative indicators by Wilmot and Baster’s relationship prototype, I can establish that I tried to engage my father into conversations other than the formal ones that characterized our relationship. I later realized that I was capable of changing the way my father and I related. I took it upon myself to inject some life into the void relationship between my father and me. My decision to change this relationship was mainly influenced by what I saw in the media. In case of any family, the media portrays a family where the head of the family sets an example of a role model and moulds the family into a strong loving unit. With these expectations, I saw that it was not only my father’s role to play but rather the entire family. I am glad to say that I now feel free around my father and get to share with him what challenges me in life.