Back to Gaffer's Variety.
Gaffer Variety:
Creativity and Craziness Four 013:
By Willie Gaffer:
November 7, 2005:
In my previous essay I noticed that some people do not want to change and no amount of therapy can influence that position. I suspect the resistance to change is rooted in a fear of what may result. Getting better may mean accepting our commitments, even the implicit ones. There is the risk of being expected to be more responsible. There is the risk of having to take on more work. There is the risk that we may have to make real changes, get off our butts and act creatively. Worst of all, there is the risk of losing all our excuses, of not being able to fool ourselves anymore, never mind fooling others. Thus, people who are "getting by" are likely to evade any activity which could cause real change.
Finally, to reiterate a previous point, when a counselor and a client are emotionally involved, the attempt at recovery will not work! That's all we need to know. We don't need to tell folks not to mess around or that emotional involvement is wrong. We should make it clear that messing around is not therapy and will quickly undermine the client-counselor relationship. It may be great but we must decide which relationship we want. Both with the same person is not possible.
For the counseling to work, it is important to love your client without being in love with your client. Sex may be great and neat but it's not therapy. Rules are not necessary. If people come into a counseling situation and treat it like a meat market, they will lose in the end. It's important to note that no one person can cause this problem. It takes cooperation and each person must bear responsibility for his or her acts.
To summarize: given that we recognize we are in some way diminished; given that we want to recover our potential; and given that we can find a way to create an environment of unconditional non-judgmental support; recovery of lost creative talent is eminently possible.
For the folks who would rather have Harvey Jackins' theory in his own words, try writing to Rational Island Publishers, 719 2nd Ave. N., Seattle, Washington, 98109-4102. If his books are still in print, they may have them. The book you want is Fundamentals of Co-Counseling Manual, by Harvey Jackins. It contains the entire theory and detailed practice of Re-Evaluation Counseling.
In addition to Re-evaluation Counseling, I have looked at, read about and messed in several other theories and tools for recovering lost creative capacity including pretty much all of the great psychological theorists of Western Civilization. Many methods of treatment for craziness have evolved from the theories of these great men and women. The problem I find with most of these theories and practices is they require a professional practitioner. Most of the screwed up people I know cannot afford a plumber, never mind a 100 buck per hour psychotherapist. In addition, a paid therapist has a vested interest in prolonging the treatment. Of course, I'm biased. I believe most therapists are like most bible thumpers, either fools or charlatans.
I did try some group therapy. Depending on the facilitator this often turns into nothing more that a bull session. It's ok, but we could have more fun doing it in a bar. Yes! Therapy can take place in a bar if we stay sober. In fact it's very therapeutic to stay sober and watch other people think they are more and more clever as they get stupider and stupider. We could even say it's sobering.
There are also theories of healing that are nothing more that bullshit. I found two practices when I checked them out which I think are awful! The first is L. Ron Hubbard's Church of Scientology. I read his book called Dianetics. It defined a theory and a procedure for restoring lost potential. The procedure did contain elements similar to those found in Jackins' work but the similarity ended in practice. I went with a friend to check out the church at their office in Royal Oak, Michigan. We talked with a fellow who defined himself as a "Clear" which, at that time, was given as the highest level of human devolvement possible.
It did not improve his credibility with me when he told us he was a salesman. It also troubled me when he described women as "chicks". In addition, since he thought he was alone with two "normal" white men, he explained apologetically about blacks that, "we gotta let them in to keep our church status." If he was a "Clear," then I want to be at least opaque if not downright reflective.
I also took the Erhard Seminar Training when it was fashionable. It consisted of two weekends of vicious assault, by the facilitator, on the psyches of the participants. The purpose of this entire procedure was to coerce the people into a realization of one simple concept which everyone knows but few people realize. To wit: Your life will only work to the extent that you accept responsibility for it and keep your commitments. To the extent that you break your commitments and transfer responsibility, your life will not work. This is, of course, true. Ignoring this fact was another of the factors which hastened the demise of Jackins' community. Sadly, the Erhard method of impressing it was inexcusable emotional violence. By any other name, it is brainwashing. The problem being, when you reduce a psyche to that level, you have an open vessel into which you can pour anything at all. No thank you Mr. Erhard!
Everyone I know needs therapy. That is, they could benefit from therapy. To be sure, most people would not accept that statement. If a person is reasonably functional, they will consider themselves to be "normal" and will pooh-pooh the idea that they could be better. If they can hold a job, feed their family and keep their yard clean, they accept what and where they are. They must be normal because they are just like their neighbors. Never mind that they are in a dead end job. Never mind that they have to struggle to get out of bed and go to work. Never mind that they hate their jobs. Never mind that they live for the week end, then waste it going very fast, in small circles, on a three wheeler, a snowmobile or a jet ski.
It may be just as well that people ignore the idea of emotional improvement. The sad fact is, we don't have any therapists who could help them. Anyone who realizes they need help could be just as well off going to their local bartender. The better alternative is to get with another person and start a self-help group. I think it's better to try, than to wait till we get to the end of our life, then look around and say, "Is that all there is?" It tears me a new bunghole to have seen so many people complete their lives in anger or despair. They have a mouth full of ashes and they know, deep inside, it didn't have to be that way. If we want to function at our full potential and end our life with some degree of satisfaction, isn't it worth a try? The one thing I want to know when I die is, I did not waste all of my life. I want to know, somewhere along the way, I made the effort to be useful, creative and constructive.
Just one more point, before I leave this subject. The reason
the state should never be allowed to define or treat emotional
problems is that opposition can be defined as emotional illness.
If we let that happen, there will be no loyal opposition and George
Orwell's 1984 will finally catch up with us, just a few years
late.
Back to Gaffer's Variety.
|
|
|
|