|
WHY BOTHER?
In teaching my graduate psychotherapy class, I usually ask each
student to engage in the Adlerian exercise of delineating the various important
life tasks that she/he can recognize, and then attempt to abstract from those
tasks the overall lifestyle (Adler, 1935; or fundamental project as Sartre, 1943/1992, later called it). As the
professor, I try to participate in as many of our class exercises as I can. But
on one recent occasion of this pedagogical maneuver, I found myself confronted
with some new realities. Having listed my life tasks year after year, and
having abstracted my own fundamental project at least a dozen times before, the
exercise seemed a battle between memory, honest self-reflection, and my desire
to model something useful for my students. My own life tasks had evolved in the
preceding year in some drastic (as well as in some not-so-drastic) ways. I was
still training doctoral students in psychological research, assessments, and
therapies. I was still maintaining a modest private practice off-campus. I was
still active as an actor/singer in a local community theatre. I was still
engaged in my own research and writing in the areas of posttraumatic stress and
forensic assessment. And I was still composing the occasional poem and short
story. But I had recently married a woman with whom I had a kind of
relationship that I had not thought possible in years before. Rather than being
a relationship for which I had to sacrifice parts of myself, this partnership
somehow epitomized my identity, while simultaneously extending it and
complementing it. Now, all the other life-tasks seemed like individual
components of an integrated whole, all under the rubric of some superordinate
psychological umbrella that was exemplified (but not defined) by this new-found
relationship. It was as if I had comprehended Adler’s exercise for the very
first time. Sitting in the small seminar room, I wrote my fundamental project
in simple terms: To communicate
emotionally with those I care about, using whatever verbal and non-verbal tools
I possess.
When asked to present a paper on the psychology of creative writing
for the Constructivist Psychology Network
conference in 2008, I immediately reconnected to my fundamental project as the
guiding framework for describing my personal process of creative writing. Given
that language is inherently social (i.e., if not for the psychological and/or
actual other, language would not
exist), the use of words is perhaps our most obvious—if not our most
frequent—tool for connecting with the construction processes of another person
(engaging in sociality a la Kelly, 1955, p. 96). Clearly there are many ways of
construing the construction processes of another, and of exposing our own
constructions to the other for construal. All of our physical senses are put
into the service of sociality as we watch, touch, listen to, taste, and smell
those with whom we socially engage. Just as we use these tools to think with our social partners, we likewise
use them to feel with others
(Merleau-Ponty, 1964). Much of this feeling
with process happens at a tacit level. I see a friend whose face is
contorted in grief, and I feel sad with her. I sense fear in the subtle tremolo
of an elder’s voice on his deathbed, and a pallor of dread descends upon my own
consciousness. But how do I intentionally enter into communication designed to feel with another, and invite that other
to feel with me? For me, the answers
are myriad: I sing; I supervise; I act; I embrace and allow my emotions in the
presence of my partner; I conduct psychotherapy; I talk (sometimes about my feelings, but more often not). And,
when the mood is right and the words visit themselves upon me, I write.
Before proceeding to describe the creative writing process as a form
of emotional sociality, I must acknowledge that much written language is not in
the service of emotional connection, but is intended for denotative purposes. This is what happened, or This is how to do it, or This is what I think, or even This is what I feel are all legitimate
uses of written language. But they fall completely outside of how I use
creative writing. For me, creative writing is always using language to enter
into relationship and communicate emotion. If a story gets told (or not), or if
a fact gets communicated (or not) is at most incidental, and usually immaterial
to this purpose. But relationship is essential to such writing—the relationship
to the actual or potential reader, and even the relationships to others in my
emotional history.
On May 8 of 2008, I awoke with the memory
of a vivid dream conversation with my late friend, Michael Mahoney. In my
dream, everyone present was openly acknowledging something that is usually
glossed over regarding Michael’s death: that it was apparently suicide. I asked
him what has been on the lips of many of his friends since his passing:
“Michael…Why?” His dreamt response was so striking that I wrote it down as soon
as I awoke: “The me I always liked, I
wasn't seeing him or hearing him speak anymore. I just wanted to make him make
noise. I wanted to hear him scream one time.” Finally allowing voice to some of
my guilty anger, I responded, “In so doing, you made sure the rest of us would
never hear anything after that scream.”
Then the dream took an unexpected turn. Michael
said he wanted to coauthor something with me. I immediately inflated with pride
and satisfaction. You see, although Michael and I were, at times, very close
friends, and we talked a lot about his writings and about mine, often sharing
preliminary drafts of manuscripts, poems, and theoretical ideas, we never
coauthored anything. So I was thrilled that he considered me a legitimate
peer—enough to invite me to write something with
him. I asked about the topic, anticipating that it would be about emotion in
the therapy process, or therapist self-care, or the like. Instead, he responded
with something so mundane and obscure that I could not even recall it when
awake. Perhaps it was a chapter on the use of screwdrivers amongst
electricians, or a treatise on why political parties lose favor in difficult economic
times. It was likely neither of those topics, but no more relevant to us as
psychologists, and not at all memorable.
For a day or so, I struggled to make sense of the strange twist in
my dream. Why would my one chance to coauthor something with Michael have
nothing to do with the content of our relationship? Finally, I settled on
something that I knew all along. All of my authorship is coauthorship. Whether
I am writing a chapter on posttraumatic stress therapy at my computer or a love
note on the back of a napkin, the important relationships from throughout my
life inhabit the words. Those relationships express themselves as connotations
and invitations—connotations of the realities we co-constructed, and
invitations for any new reader to feel
with us.
THE
IMPORTANCE OF RELATIONSHIP IN CREATIVE WRITING
The most effective way I have found to use
writing in the service of emotional communication is to write in relationship. We
do not really have relationships;
they are not things that we carry around in our purses and briefcases. We
cannot store them on the SD cards in our cell phones or PDAs. Rather, we participate in relationships. It is
easiest to participate in a relationship in the physical presence of the social
other; but such physical presence is by no means necessary. Sociality requires
only that we are construing the construction processes of the other for a
social relationship to exist. So, when I write a story, I intentionally loosen
the mundane boundaries of my social circumstance and attempt to participate in
many relationships simultaneously. Firstly, I intentionally engage and
participate in relationships with my coauthors—those who supply identity to my
voice. The loudest of these tend to be my mother and father, Rue Cromwell, my
wife, and my son. Quieter, but still salient coauthoring relationships scatter
throughout my history and life-space: Michael, the mentally retarded adult who
lived next door to my childhood home, my clients, anyone with whom I ever sang
harmony or jammed on musical instruments. These relationships offer the
emotional content—the raw materials—that give substance to emotional
communication.
Secondly, when writing I intentionally
attempt to participate in relationship with the audience. After all, regardless
of whatever images, plot-lines, or feelings I am attempting to capture and
communicate, the audience will utterly and individually supply the eventual
meaning to my words (Sullivan, 1953). This sort of engagement implies caring. Unless
a reader cares (about me, about engaging with me, about being affected by me)
at least to some extent, nothing emotional can take place. How can I expect a
reader to care about me unless I care first? That caring is another part of the
emotional communication. I have to survey my caring and cared-for coauthors and
discover word-based and portable platforms on which to display and carry that
caring from my emotions to the emotions of the reader.
TRICKS/TOOLS
OF THE TRADE
Whether or not you
have children, imagine that you have a 10 year-old son or daughter. Imagine
that you are in a public place and visualize the following:
Your child is crying.
With that image in
mind:
What parts of your body react?
What do you feel?
Where do you feel it?
What parts of you are gearing up for
action?
What parts are inaccessible to you?
Now consider an alternative image:
Your child has just won a trophy at
a sports event.
Again, the
questions:
What parts of your body react?
What do you feel?
Where do you feel it?
What parts of you are gearing up for
action?
What parts are inaccessible to you?
And finally, a third image:
Your
child is misbehaving in embarrassing and socially-problematic
ways.
And the questions:
What parts of your body react?
What do you feel?
Where do you feel it?
What parts of you are gearing up for
action?
What parts are inaccessible to you?
Because our emotional
construction processes are almost entirely non-verbal, when perceiving emotion
in another person we often begin by making a bodily copy of what we perceive in
the other. That allows us to perceive the feelings by feeling with the other (which is very different than simply
cognitively inferring what the other person might be feeling). Sometimes, but
certainly not always, we take the time and effort to connect the emotional copy
(derived by feeling with the other) to
our verbal/verbalizeable constructs (perhaps to talk to your child, or to boast
about her trophy to a friend, or to tell your child’s therapist that stronger
interventions are needed). That is how emotional communication typically
proceeds when the communication is the means to some other end.
But in creative
writing, the emotional communication is the end in itself. So, in creative
writing, I attempt to deconstruct the sequence described above and enact it in
reverse. I attempt to use verbal tags and their paraverbal contexts,
inflections, and aesthetics…NOT just to denote meaning (or deliver meaning
directly)…but rather to create a non-verbal getting-it
(or feeling with) in the personal
space of the audience.
Perhaps the most
powerful tool for communicating emotion is the intensive involvement of the
body via sensorial language. Try the following exercise:
Think about the
morning after a night with little sleep and the experience of the first
desperately-desired cup of coffee. Allow yourself to experience your body with
the imagination. Now say the word, coffee,
aloud. Hear it fully. Feel it. If the way the word sounded did not match with
your feeling, say it aloud again. Say just the word, but communicate as best
you can, the context, implications, and bodily reality that the word-in-feeling-state carries.
Now change the scenario. Imagine the smell of coffee in your
mother’s kitchen signifying the family gathered for a holiday. Again allow
yourself to experience your body with the imagination, and then say the word, coffee, aloud. As before, align the
sound of the word with the feeling.
One more scenario. You are a coffee plantation owner in South
America. You stand on the hillside and overlook the vast fruits of your life’s
work. Now utter the word, coffee.
You could repeat the above process with any number of mantra-words. For
example, say the word fly with
scenarios of (1) soaring above life’s problems; (2) rushing to get the children
to school; and (3) going on yet another business trip away from the family. Or
say the word God with scenarios of
(1) transcendent connection with the ground of all being; (2) the
self-appointed status of your ego-inflated boss; (3) a supernatural being that
makes arbitrary decisions about the eternal status of individual human beings).
The creative
writer takes a feeling state (as an example, you could use one evoked by the
exercise above) with all its associations and embodied experience, and then
considers what language, what metaphors, what relationships from the past or
present, what descriptions of bodily experience, might bring a reader to share
that word-in-feeling-state with the
writer.
I will illustrate
this process with two brief stories, each written for very different reasons. In
each, notice the body references that invite the reader into the felt
experience, and the metaphors that attempt to enhance the sociality of
association.
The following essay was written on
September 12, 2001, the day after the most impactful tragedy of my lifetime. The
word (or feeling state) being
grappled with still defies verbalization. Whether or not it was communicated
nonetheless will be yours to judge.
Having awoken today in a new existence...a
different society, I find it amazing that my memories of yesterday are more
visceral than visual—more pathetic than horrific. I spent all day yesterday NOT
doing a variety of things. Most of all, I spent the day NOT crying. Somehow,
the sense that my shock and grief—however profound it might have been—was too
small...too removed...for me to be allowed the luxury of tears. Those tears
waited patiently in line behind the half-paranoid glances around my own
physical space, behind my look into the eyes of two teenage sons’ eyes as they
struggled to understand their new existence, behind the stare onto my computer
screen for work that would distract. The tears wait in line like passengers at
terminals in airports waiting for planes that may never take off. They may
curse their inconvenience, never knowing the blessing of their circumstance.
Others—my mother for example—allowed the
tears to flow. Whether for better or for worse, those souls whose vessels of
compassion have been emptied for their fellows must be awaking today with eyes
that feel much different than mine...memories of yesterday that are less
implosive, even if no less devastating.
Because I still
cannot cry today, I write. Perhaps tomorrow, I will have something more useful
to share.
The next story, from 2006, contains very
different content. I had never noticed the common theme between this story and
the one above until I selected it for inclusion in this paper. I suspect the
two together may communicate more about masculine conflict in expressing
emotions than either alone.
The
Day We Cried in Our Cereal
Scooby was a beautiful dog. But his
appearance was certainly not typical. His father was a German police dog and
his mother was a collie. Although the siblings in his litter had the hair
pattern and coloration of their German police dog patronage, Scooby stood out
as amusingly different. He had strawberry blonde hair, which seemed oddly out
of place on a body type that otherwise resembled his father’s strong shepherd
form. As he grew out of the puppy stage, the strawberry blonde hair grew long
and became curly. In addition to being utterly unusual, this curly blonde hair
gave Scooby a distinctly girlish look—even as his body type continued to mature
toward the large guard-dog musculature. Somehow, the dichotomies in his
physical characteristics were matched in his personality. Although capable of
fierce aggression toward other dogs, Scooby was always gentle with
people—especially children—and had a playful spirit that defied all correction
and attempts at training.
Scooby had two great passions in his life:
chasing the school bus; and lounging in my mother’s juniper bush on the east
side of our house. There was just something about a large canister of screaming
children that Scooby couldn’t resist. Scooby would come to the bus to greet my
sister and me, then we would have to hold onto him tightly as the driver pulled
away. In the mornings, my mother would lock him in the garage so we could board
the bus without him following us around the rural section-line dirt-road square
that we called “around the block”. Finally, Mom began locking Scooby in the
garage even in the afternoons, to preempt the daily wrestling match. Regarding
the juniper bush, it was a decadent pleasure for Scooby to lie on the puffy,
round shrub, which must have seemed like a cool feather-bed after being shaded
from the afternoon sun by the eave of the house. Mom had other plans for her
bush than for it to be flattened like an old pillow on a daily basis, so she
would shoo Scooby off each time she caught him there. She even resorted to the
rolled-up newspaper now and again.
I suppose that every boy has a special
connection to his dog. But I always felt as though Scooby and I were alike in
some important ways that I didn’t understand. Looking back on it now, I see
some of the same tense opposites in my boyhood existence that I recall in
Scooby. I was a large and muscular boy, largely owing to my own German heritage.
And I could be “all-boy”, as the older folks would say, just as much as my male
relatives and playmates. My attraction to sports and physical work with my
father seemed to attest to my male identity. But somehow my size and shape
stood at odds with my red hair (not inherited from my mother or from my
father)...and with my emotional sensitivities that could have me writing a
poem, reading the Bible, or playing house with the girls just as easily as
organizing a tackle football game. People often seemed not to know what to make
of this overgrown man-boy who might be emotionally hurt by an off-handed
remark. I now think that my awareness of these competing extremes in my own
identity gave me a special empathy for Scooby, and a certain kind of envy for how
he enacted his personality with great gusto...certainly giving no thought to
the expectations of others. They say that dogs mature seven times faster than
humans...
One day Mom picked up my sister and me from
school, and we ran some errands before returning home. When we opened the
garage to let Scooby out, he did not emerge. It didn’t take long for Mom to
regretfully realize that she must have forgotten to lock him away that
afternoon. The school bus had long come and gone, and Scooby was nowhere in
sight. We drove “around the block” to scan for Scooby in all directions, hoping
to find him chasing a rabbit in some nearby field. No Scooby. Although our
negative imaginations were well-founded and thoroughly feared, we also knew how
common it was in 1970s rural Oklahoma for an unleashed pet to wander off for
unwitnessed adventures, only to return home either unscathed or with only a few
battle-scars to show for the trip. So we hoped for a safe return for Scooby.
At breakfast the next morning, I had
already asked Mom if Scooby had come home. She said he had not. While my sister
and I ate cereal and milk, Mom followed Dad out to his truck as he was leaving
for work. I knew that something was wrong when they both returned. Mom was
crying. They took my sister and me outside to see our beloved pet. Scooby had
indeed returned. He had made it back home, apparently after an unsuccessful
encounter with the school bus, and had laid himself to rest in my mother’s
juniper bush.
My sister and I came back to the kitchen;
on a school day, we still had to finish breakfast and get ready for the day. My
sister cried in full, free sobs...the tears mixing with the milk of her
tasteless cereal. I struggled with my tears. They wanted to come out. But I was
supposed to be the man, right? So, I strained and I mourned on the inside...and
then eventually cried anyway, but not without a healthy dose of embarrassment.
It took me many
more years to mature as much as Scooby...to learn to express all of my personality
without doubting my legitimacy. I only wish Scooby could see me now (or rather,
I wish I could see him).
I suppose this sort of creative writing
comes easier to some persons than to others. And, of course, there are
technical, grammatical, lexical, and empathic skills that can make some writers
better at it than the average person.
But I am convinced that most non-writers choose their silence not for lack of
talent, but for fear of emotional risk. There is indeed emotional and social
risk involved in telling a story and allowing an audience to respond. Likewise,
however, there is much emotional and social satisfaction to be gained in the
effort.
I will conclude this paper with the
challenge I posed to the audience at the end of the Victoria symposium in 2008.
Answer me
honestly:
Raise your hand
if you can sing.
Raise your hand
if you can draw.
Raise your hand
if you can dance.
Raise your hand
if you can play the drums.
Now place
yourself back into your frame of mind as a five-year-old:
Raise your hand
if you can sing.
Raise your hand
if you can draw.
Raise your hand
if you can dance.
Raise your hand
if you can play the drums.
What has changed
since you were five?
| |