I’ve been wondering if all the shopworn psychology – the pop psych-corrupted “disorder” names and symptoms, all the therapy assumptions and techniques – could be eliminated in favor of an existential approach. I don’t mean Viktor Frankl’s or Irvin Yalom’s existentialism, which lives in the realm of clinician’s philosophy and client’s intellect. Rather, a therapy based simply on the question, “Who am I?”, with answers emanating from the oceanic inclusions of the person.
Both people in
the room would have to eschew psych thinking, and the client, erasing everything
he believes he knows, would sink into the question miles deep, in head silence,
before letting a response emerge. This
is because we can read the pieces of our real self – all the elusive and quiddity
truths of it – by presenting the body with open-ended questions. “Who am I?”
“How is my life going right now?”
“What do I care about?” “What
does ‘care’ mean to me?” The body knows
– because it owns – the infinitude of historical feelings that make the facts,
far more than our idea-generating, safe-guessing head knows what’s ultimately real.
As we read the
body’s archives, we are knowing our psychology, are one with it. We are knowing physical-emotional history-sensations
that are as complexly related to the word “depression” or “love” or “self” or
“codependency” as a catalog of chemicals, temperatures, energies and unknowns
is to the word “sun.” When we find
feelings of confusion and hurt – that actually did hurt our throat or stomach
or eyes – at age six; when we feel in our chest the bleak ’til-Kingdom-come
boredom of being under-parented at age four or eight; when we feel love that
wants to reach to someone and shame that kills it at age ten; when we feel the
emptiness between our eyes of moving away from our unique childhood into
awkward and frightening adolescence, and now feel those forces creating the
foundation and horizon of our present self; when we see that sensations, with
time, have become conclusions – anchors or agitators of attitude and energy – then
we become the explanations of ourselves, with no "disorder"
labels at all. We also become the potential solutions to ourselves, because pain found wants and drives its outletting.
If this idea
isn’t clear, see its contrast with Yalom's existential approach:
Imagine
this scene: three to four hundred people, strangers to each other, are told to pair
up and ask their partner one single question: “What do you want?” over and over
and over again.
Could
anything be simpler? One innocent
question and its answer. And yet, time
after time, I have seen this group exercise evoke unexpectedly powerful feelings. Often, within minutes, the room rocks with
emotion. Men and women – and these are
by no means desperate or needy but successful, well-functioning, well-dressed
people who glitter as they walk – are stirred to their depths. They call out to those who are forever lost –
dead or absent parents, spouses, children, friends: “I want to see you
again.” “I want your love.” “I want to know you’re proud of me.” “I want you to know I love you and how sorry
I am I never told you.” . . . “I want the childhood I never had.” “I want to be healthy – to be young
again.” . . . “I want my life to mean
something.”
.
. . . “So much wanting. So much
longing. And so much pain, so close to
the surface, only minutes deep. Destiny
pain. Existence pain. Pain that is always there, whirring
continuously just beneath the membrane of life.”**
I believe that Yalom
is wrong, very wrong. These people, so
plaintive and profound, are not crying from “existence” or “destiny pain,” but from actual, deep,
unhealed injuries, probably with labyrinthine roots reaching to their
childhood. Imagine if this were not a
ripened adult but a fourteen- or seventeen-year-old boy grieving, “I want to
know you’re proud of me.” Contrary to
Yalom’s wise philosophizing, no therapist should abandon the young man on a
cushion of resignation or contemplation, as if it were right that he should
have to be worthy of their pride. Within
his supplication, in the body’s vault is the imprint of his father’s icy rage
when he brought home a grade report that was imperfect. Within his grievance pool is the sudden gutting
of his self-value and its replacement by fear of abandonment; fear of shame,
death of a bond, a giving of love that evaporates, sense of impossibility,
questioning of love, a new dark energy that replaces the happy one, an
akathisia-like pushing for success to banish failure. And later in his life, a sense of
meaninglessness or of running nowhere, of covert aloneness that can’t be
described to anyone.
In this body continent
is found the truth as it was lived, and as it is being lived: answers that come from all time, telescoped. You can feel the currents shift,
your earth move, the past instantly awaken, the answers summoned to the surface when
you ask your inner feeling the cosmic questions.
Who, in that deeply rooted home, would want to escape back to the hackneyed labels and
explanations of psychology? Psychology
is the personal self that, like love,
must be touched to know it. A session that stays in that touching place, then, can be quiet yet travel very far.
And so today I
asked a 19-year-old to fall into the question: “Who am I?”
- - - - - - - -
- - -
* See the related post, Rabbit Hole, at http://pessimisticshrink.blogspot.com/2015/01/rabbit-hole.html.
** Irvin D. Yalom, Love’s Executioner and other tales of psychotherapy, Basic Books, 1989. Prologue, p. xi.
** Irvin D. Yalom, Love’s Executioner and other tales of psychotherapy, Basic Books, 1989. Prologue, p. xi.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are welcome, but I'd suggest you first read "Feeling-centered therapy" and "Ocean and boat" for a basic introduction to my kind of theory and therapy.