ripeness, transcended himself by reaching out to others, and lived
in a manner that he would be willing to repeat perpetually
throughout eternity.
He had always remained curious about the direction the
therapy groups would take the following week. Now, with his last
good year visibly shrinking, all feelings were intensified: his
curiosity had evolved into an eager childlike anticipation of the
next meeting. He remembered how, years ago, when he taught
group therapy the beginning students complained of boredom as
they observed ninety minutes of talking heads. Later, when they
learned how to listen to the drama of each patient`s life and to
appreciate the exquisitely complex interaction between members,
boredom dissolved and every student was in place early awaiting
the next installment.
The looming end of the group propelled members to address
their core issues with increased ardor. A visible end to therapy
always has that result; for that reason pioneer practitioners like
Otto Rank and Carl Rogers often set a termination date at the very
onset of therapy.
Stuart did more work in those months than in three previous
years of therapy. Perhaps Philip had jump–started Stuart by serving
as a mirror. He saw parts of himself in Philip`s misanthropy and
realized that every member of the group, except the two of them,
took pleasure in the meetings and considered the group a refuge, a
place of support and caring. Only he and Philip attended under
duress—Philip in order to obtain supervision from Julius, and he
because of his wife`s ultimatum.
At one meeting Pam commented that the group never
formed a true circle because Stuart`s chair was invariably set back
a bit, sometimes only a couple of inches, but big inches. Others
agreed; they had all felt the seating asymmetry but never connected
it to Stuart`s avoidance of closeness.
In another meeting Stuart launched into a familiar grievance
as he described his wife`s attachment to her father, a physician
who rose from chairman of a surgery department, to medical
school dean, to president of a university. When Stuart continued,
as he had in previous meetings, to discuss the impossibility of ever
winning his wife`s regard because she continually compared him
to her father, Julius interrupted to inquire whether he was aware
that he had often told this story before.
After Stuart responded, «But surely we should be bringing
up issues that continue to be bothersome. Shouldn`t we?» Julius
then asked a powerful question: «How did you think we would feel
about your repetition?»
«I imagine you`d find it tedious or boring.»
«Think about that, Stuart. What`s the payoff for you in being
tedious or boring? And then think about why you`ve never
developed empathy for your listeners.»
Stuart did think about that a great deal during the following
week and reported feeling astonished to realize how little he ever
considered that question. «I know my wife often finds me tedious;
her favorite term for me isabsent, and I guess the group is telling
me the same thing. You know, I think I`ve put my empathy into
deep storage.»
A short time later Stuart opened up a central problem: his
ongoing inexplicable anger toward his twelve–year–old son. Tony
opened a Pandora`s box by asking, «What were you like when you
were your son`s age?»
Stuart described growing up in poverty; his father had died
when he was eight, and his mother, who worked two jobs, was
never home when he returned from school. Hence, he had been a
latch–key child, preparing his own dinner, wearing the same soiled
clothes to school day after day. For the most part, he had
succeeded in suppressing the memory of his childhood, but his
son`s presence propelled him back to horrors long forgotten.
«Blaming my son is crazy,” he said, «but I just keep feeling
envy and resentment when I see his privileged life.» It was Tony
who helped crack Stuart`s anger with an effective reframing
intervention: «What about spending some time feeling proud at
providing that better life for your son?»
Almost everyone made progress. Julius had seen this before;
when groups reach a state of ripeness, all the members seem to get
better at once. Bonnie struggled to come to terms with a central
paradox: her rage toward her ex–husband for having left her and
her relief that she was out of a relationship with a man she so
thoroughly disliked.
Gill attended daily AA meetings—seventy meetings in
seventy days—but his marital difficulties increased, rather than
decreased, with his sobriety. That, of course, was no mystery to
Julius: whenever one spouse improves in therapy, the homeostasis
of the marital relationship is upset and, if the marriage is to stay
solvent, the other spouse must change as well. Gill and Rose had
begun couples` therapy, but Gill wasn`t convinced that Rose could
change. However, he was no longer terrified at the thought of
ending the marriage; for the first time he truly understood one of
Julius`s favoritebon mots: «The only way you can save your
marriage is to be willing (and able) to leave it.»
Tony worked at an astonishing pace—as though Julius`s
depleting strength were seeping directly into him. With Pam`s
encouragement, strongly reinforced by everyone else in the group,
he decided to stop complaining of being ignorant and, instead, do
something about it—get an education—and enrolled in three night
courses at the local community college.
However thrilling and gratifying these widespread changes,
Julius`s central attention remained riveted on Philip and Pam. Why
their relationship had taken on such importance for him was
unclear, though Julius was convinced the reasons transcended the
particular. Sometimes when thinking about Pam and Philip, he was
visited by the Talmudic phrase «to redeem one person is to save
the whole world.» The importance of redeeming their relationship
soon loomed large. Indeed it became his raison d`ГЄtre: it was as
though he could save his own life by salvaging something human
from the wreckage of that horrific encounter years before. As he
mused about the meaning of the Talmudic phrase, Carlos entered
his mind. He had worked with Carlos, a young man, a few years
ago. No, it must have been longer, at least ten years, since he
remembered talking to Miriam about Carlos. Carlos was a
particularly unlikable man, crass, self–centered, shallow, sexually
driven, who sought his help when he was diagnosed with a fatal
lymphoma. Julius helped Carlos make some remarkable changes,
especially in the realm of connectivity, and those changes allowed
him to flood his entire life retrospectively with meaning. Hours
before he died he told Julius, «Thank you for saving my life.»
Julius had thought about Carlos many times, but now at this
moment his story assumed a new and momentous meaning—not
only for Philip and Pam, but for saving his own life, as well.
In most ways Philip appeared less pompous and more
approachable in the group, even making occasional eye contact
with most members, save Pam. The six–month mark came and
went without Philip raising the subject of dropping because he had
fulfilled his six–month contract. When Julius raised the issue,
Philip responded, «To my surprise group therapy is a far more
complex phenomenon than I had originally thought. I`d prefer you
supervise my work with clients while I was also attending the
group, but you`ve rejected that idea because of the problems of
вЂdual relationships.` My choice is to remain in the group for the
entire year and to request supervision after that.»
«I`m fine with that plan,” Julius agreed, «but it depends, of
course, on the state of my health. The group has four more months
before we end, and after that we`ll have to see. My health
guarantee was only for one year.»
Philip`s change of mind about group participation was not
uncommon. Members often enter a group with one circumscribed
goal in mind, for example, to sleep better, to stop having
nightmares, to overcome a phobia. Then, in a few months, they
often formulate different, more far–reaching goals, for example, to
learn how to love, to recapture zest for life, to overcome loneliness,
to develop self–worth.
From time to time the group pressed Philip to describe more
precisely how Schopenhauer had helped so much when Julius`s
psychotherapy had so utterly failed. Because he had difficulty
answering questions about Schopenhauer without providing the
necessary philosophical background, he requested the group`s
permission to give a thirty–minute lecture on the topic. The group
groaned, and Julius urged him to present the relevant material
more succinctly and conversationally.
The following session Philip embarked upon a brief
lecturette which, he promised, would succinctly answer the
question of how Schopenhauer had helped him.
Though he had notes in his hand, he spoke without referring
to them. Staring at the ceiling, he began, «It`s not possible to
discuss Schopenhauer without starting with Kant, the philosopher
whom, along with Plato, he respected above all others. Kant, who
died in 1804 when Schopenhauer was sixteen, revolutionized
philosophy with his insight that it is impossible for us to
experience reality in any veritable sense because all of our
perceptions, our sense data, are filtered and processed through our
inbuilt neuroanatomical apparatus. All data are conceptualized
through such arbitrary constructs as space and time and—”
«Come on, Philip, get to the point,” interrupted Tony. «How
did this dude help you?»
«Wait, I`m getting there. I`ve spoken for all of three
minutes. This is not the TV news; I can`t explain the conclusions
of one of the world`s greatest thinkers in a sound bite.»
«Hey, hey, right on, Philip. I like that answer,” said Rebecca.
Tony smiled and backed off.
«So Kant`s discovery was that, rather than experience the
world as it`s really out there, we experience our own personalized
processed version of what`s out there. Such properties as space,
time, quantity, causality arein us, not out there—we impose them
on reality. But, then, whatis pure, unprocessed reality? What`s
really out there, that raw entity before we process it?That will
always remain unknowable to us, said Kant.»
«Schopenhauer—how he helped you! Remember? Are we
getting warm?» asked Tony.
«Coming up in ninety seconds. In his future work Kant and
others turned their entire attention to the ways in which we process
primal reality.
«But Schopenhauer—and see, here we are already!—took a
different route. He reasoned that Kant had overlooked a
fundamental and immediate type of data about ourselves: our own
bodies and our own feelings. We can know ourselves from
theinside, he insisted. We have direct, immediate knowledge, not
dependent on our perceptions. Hence, he was the first philosopher
to look at impulses and feelings from theinside, and for the rest of
his career he wrote extensively about interior human concerns: sex,
love, death, dreams, suffering, religion, suicide, relations with
others, vanity, self–esteem. More than any other philosopher, he
addressed those dark impulses deep within that we cannot bear to
know and, hence, must repress.»
«Sounds a little Freudian,” said Bonnie.
«The other way around. Better to say that Freud is
Schopenhauerian. So much of Freudian psychology is to be found
in Schopenhauer. Though Freud rarely acknowledged this
influence, there is no doubt he was quite familiar with
Schopenhauer`s writings: in Vienna during the time Freud was in
school, the 1860s and вЂ70s, Schopenhauer`s name was on
everyone`s lips. I believe that without Schopenhauer there could
have been no Freud—and, for that matter, no Nietzsche as we
know him. In fact Schopenhauer`s influence on Freud—
particularly dream theory, the unconscious, and the mechanism of
repression—was the topic of my doctoral dissertation.
«Schopenhauer,” Philip continued, glancing at Tony and
hurrying to avoid being interrupted, «normalized my sexuality. He
made me see how ubiquitous sex was, how, at the deepest levels, it
was the central point of all action, seeping into all human
transactions, influencing even all matters of state. I believe I
recited some of his words about this some months ago.»
«Just to support your point,” Tony said, «I read in the
newspaper the other day that pornography takes in more money
than the music and the film industry combined. That`s huge.»
«Philip,” said Rebecca, «I can guess at it, but I still haven`t
heard you say exactly how Schopenhauer helped you recover from
your sexual compulsion or...uh...addiction.Okay if I use that
term?»
«I need to think about that. I`m not persuaded it`s entirely
accurate,” said Philip.
«Why?» asked Rebecca. «What you described sounds like an
addiction to me.»
«Well, to follow up on what Tony said, have you seen the
figures for males watching pornography on the Internet?»
«Are you into Internet porno?» asked Rebecca.
«I`m not, but I could have taken that route in the past—along
with the majority of men.»
«Right about that,” said Tony. «I admit it, I watch it two or
three times a week. Tell you the truth, I don`t know anyone who
doesn`t.»
«Me, too,” said Gill. «Another of Rose`s pet peeves.»
Heads turned toward Stuart. «Yes, yes, mea culpa—I`ve
been known to indulge a bit.»
«This is what I mean,” said Philip. «So is everyone an
addict?»
«Well,” said Rebecca, «I can see your point. There`s not just
the porn, but there`s also the epidemic of harassment suits. I`ve
defended quite a few in my practice. I saw an article the other day
about a dean of a major law school resigning because of a sex
harassment charge. And, of course, the Clinton case and the way
his potentially great voice has been stilled. And then look at how
many of Clinton`s prosecutors were behaving similarly.»
«Everybody`s got a dark sex life,” said Tony. «Some of it`s
like—who`s unlucky? Maybe males are just being males. Look at
me, look at my jail time in being too pushy in my demands for a
blow job from Lizzie. I know a hundred guys who did worse—and
no consequences—look at Schwarzenegger.»
«Tony, you`re not endearing yourself to the females here. 0r
at least to this female,” said Rebecca. «But I don`t want to lose
