Quite true. What is important to me may not be important for others. I have recognized that and I've tried to be better at identifying and remarking on those things that others find fascinating. It takes effort though, and I'm not always up to the task. Sometimes (most times?) it's easier to retreat inward and live life inside my own head. Of course, as I'm often reminded, that's not fair for those that share my life.
But my question is, do they really share my life, or do they merely want me to be available so that I can "decorate" theirs? I mean, when I expend (what to me is) monumental effort to notice, admire and expound upon their needs, and they spend so little time to attend to mine. Is that sharing?
Well, of course you do have to climb down out of your head and find common ground upon which to communicate.
I know (through experience) that the world I live in is indescribable and incomprehensible to most other people.
Most of the lighter conversations here on this message board could be had with just about any social group. The more technical ones concerning MBTI or the more controversial ones on politics and religion would be appropriate for an educated group (a group of young professionals) or a specialized group (a book discussion group, meetings of a psychology- or philosophy-oriented group, a geek/Mensa-style social event, etc.).
The point is that if you feel like you can interact and share here, then you can find social groups where you can interact and share at the same level in conversation.
I also know that I lack the immediate skills to relay my world to others. By "immediate" I mean that by the time I'm able to construct an adequate explanation of what, and how, I think - it's too late, the flow has moved elsewhere, the attention-span has been lost. I'm exponentially better online because I can construct my thoughts in the time it takes to do so and no one is the wiser that it took me 30 minutes to produce one paragraph. In real-time, that is generally intolerable.
Conversational skills are like driving skills. The first few times you drive a car, it seems complicated and you have to think about every little move (turn signals, brakes, gas pedal, observing traffic in order to merge) before you do it. But pretty quickly everything becomes rote and reflex. Same with conversation. After enough exposure to social settings, you come up with shorthand ways to explain things quickly. You learn to draw others out for greater interaction or to pique their interest so that they'll draw you out and ask for more info. You react and interact by rote and reflex. And if a conversational subject is involved, you watch your audience so that you can see what interests them or bores them so that you can tune up your interaction appropriately in the future.
*************
I spent 7 years in the Marine Corps, and about 4 of those years I lived in open squadbays (30-60 men in one long open hall, using wall lockers to divide the area into partial cubicles). There was no privacy, which drove me nuts sometimes, but the opportunity to observe people was unparalleled. There was activity at all hours: roving poker games, people lolling about discussing anything and everything, shouting matches, drunken brawls, people coming and going and looking for or offering rides to get fast food or go out drinking, etc. There were distinct pecking orders, social groups, competitions, privileges given or withdrawn according to rank, spoken and unspoken conventions and customs, etc. There were intellectuals, geeks, jocks, hard partiers, etc.
I probably spent the first year or so just observing and only got to know the few people in my immediate area. But across time I picked up the rhythm of the interactions, moved out more and more into the general society of the barracks, and got to know (and partied with) pretty much everyone at one time or another. At the end I was a senior sergeant in the barracks, responsible for general order and clean-up in the barracks, and interacted with everyone as both a roommate and their immediate superior.
As a result, I have an encyclopedia of human behavior in my head. I know all the quick come-backs and appropriate (and inappropriate) responses for any challenge. I know how average guys handle just about any big life event, because on long evenings people would sit around in the barracks talking about dating, sex, their families, marriages, divorces, children, deaths in the family, racial issues, childhoods in different parts of the countries and different economic backgrounds, etc. When people are bored, they talk.
Of course, that was the Marine Corps, and not everything was G-rated. The atmosphere was pretty testosterone-laden and competitive. But after that exposure and experience, it's easy enough for me to observe any new group or environment, note the pecking order and customs, and pick up the flow enough to join in pretty quickly.
Sometimes I forget that others don't have that same kind of background and experience. I'm surprised when others get tongue-tied saying even simple things or are paranoid about making a wrong impression. But then I remember how tongue-tied and paranoid I was before age 18.
Both of my wives (past and present) have accused me of being "arrogant." They love(d) that arrogance when I'm dealing with the rest of the world, because I effectively fear nothing and I can stroll with them on my arm confidently into just about any kind of social environment or situation and handle things competently. But during an argument at home, that "arrogance" gets directed at them, and then they say witheringly, "You're so arrogant!" And I respond, "No shit. I'm an ex-Marine. Why
wouldn't I be arrogant?"
There's nothing wrong with arrogance. You just hold your own and don't worry if you ruffle a few feathers along the way. And meantime, in a new group or setting I observe and see what works or doesn't work, what people like or don't like. Eventually I fit in, though it may be rough going at the start when my manners or language don't quite match those of the group.
But I would just point out that it's not necessary to "get it right" the first time out (or even the tenth time out) with a new group or a new setting. There's always an adjustment period with a new group, it's always a little rocky. But you stick with it, learn how the group operates, and later you use the long-term exposure to smooth over any negative impressions from the initial adjustment period.
The main thing is to get on in there and participate. If you need to pin down a starting persona with which to project yourself into the group, then put on the "mask" of a friend or family member and say whatever they would say--just to get you over the initial awkwardness and start participating.
With time and exposure to different groups you get that encyclopedia of behavior in your head and you have easy access to appropriate responses and behaviors; you needn't fear doing something completely inappropriate because you've seen others handle similar situations the same way. With a new group your responses may not be a perfect fit, but at least you can take confidence that they won't be horribly wrong either.
But I don't see any other way to do it. If you want to connect with people around you, you have to put yourself out there at some point.
One-on-one communication may seem safer in that you can observe and pre-select individuals with similar interests; but you can waste a lot of time cultivating individuals only to find that the interaction isn't working. Across time I prefer getting my feet wet with groups, finding individual points of contact with multiple people within the group, and then observing the group to continue filling out my encyclopedia of appropriate behavior so that I continue to have that instantaneous sense of what's appropriate and inappropriate behavior in multiple settings.
Do I ever feel invisible? Maybe once upon a time I did, a few decades ago. But these days, I'm too "arrogant" for that.
I put my real self out there using standard social/conversational skills much as a good driver gets himself down the road using good driving skills.
I grant that I do make some compromises. After all, the conversation can't always be about me and the things I'm interested in. I adjust my expectations according to the social setting, climb out of my head, and seek common ground. But given any topic of conversation, I can be honest and put my own spin on things. I don't feel unduly restricted or inhibited by normal social conventions any more than a driver normally feels restricted or inhibited by the limitations of the car and the road. (And if I do feel the need to go "off-roading" conversationally, I can always seek out a specialized social group that shares a particular interest of mine.)
I've never considered small talk to be trivial! it's so interesting to learn about other people and thier experiences and thoughts 
