Dear reader,
before the movie "The Silence of The Lambs" there was the same-titled book by Thomas Harris and before that book was the book "Red Dragon". (The latter being filmed twice, by the way, once in 1986 with the title "Manhunter" and William Petersen as the lead role of the investigator and Brian Cox as Dr. Hannibal Lecter. The movie from 2002 has Edward Norton as the investigator and Anthony Hopkins in his staring role as Dr. Hannibal Lecter.) "Red Dragon" is about the former FBI agent Will Graham. He became famous after helping identifying Lecter as the offender and then catching him.
The former supervisor visits Graham and seeks his help in the brutal murder of two families. He notices that during the intense conversation, Graham uses more and more of the rhythm and syntax of his dialogue partner. Graham doesn't do that intentionally to build a good connection between them, but unconsciously.
I noticed that and it happened to me, too. Once I was at my aunt's in Hamburg for about a week and after two or three days, I noticed, that I was talking in a different way. Back home I was talking my own usual way again.
Budding people of the social field, such as therapists, are told to notice the voice, rhythm, speed and use of words of their clients and adjust their own way of speaking accordingly. It creates sympathy on an unconscious level and a connection between the people talking to each other.
There's this saying that dogs often look like the owner. Which is no surprise, especially if they had been living together already for a long time. Adjusting doesn't only happen on a verbal level, but also with looks or gestures and body posture. Sometimes consciously, more often unconsciously.
Trends are set that way, too. We like a person and we like what he or she is wearing or how they are wearing it, so we start to do as they do. For many years I used to wear my wrist watch with the face on the inner side of my wrist. I had seen Bruce Willis wearing his wrist watch that way in many movies and also Matt Smith in his portrayal of the 11th Doctor in "Doctor Who" in at least two episodes, checks his wrist watch with the face on the inner side of his wrist. For some weeks, also analog to the 11th Doctor, I'm wearing a pocket watch. I don't wear my wrist watch anymore at this moment. No, it's not the owl wrist watch I have bought in april. It's a proper pocket watch with clipper to clip it to the brim of the pocket and a chain. I was especially thinking of Derren Brown and hypnotists generally, of whom you'd almost expect to waggle a pocket watch in front of your eyes to make you go into a trance. So my pocket watch has nothing to do with the Doctor!!!
Such things can work like little lucky charms or nervers. At least they do for me. Wearing a scarf the way Benedict Cumberbatch does as Sherlock Holmes for example. Maybe a purple scarf, purple being Milton Erickson's favourite colour...
David Calof was a student of Milton Erickson. In his audio set "Hypnotic Techniques", he starts by saying that "I'm one of those people, who believe that Ericksonianism died in 1980, when Erickson died and that we're actually in a post Erickson era." So he wouldn't stand here saying he was Ericksonian. Although he had the privileg of studying with him. He isn't Ericksonian. He is Calofian, he supposed. For starters, that's a funny thing to say and maybe a bit arrogant, too. One might argue whether or not Ericksonianism could have been done only by Erickson himself and indeed died with Erickson. The most "absolute" form of it certainly did. Erickson as a human and therapist was unbelievably complex and multilayered. Not one single person alone will completely "get" him and internalise it for themselves. To be like him for the sake of his genius and to act like he did, would only be a copy. Erickson was very creative and revolutionised the psyotherapy and hypnotherapy of his time. It's certainly worth checking out his way of working and how he did things. In the end however, everybody should find their own way of doing therapy. It would be sad, only to be a cheap copy of somebody else. Especially since there isn't just Erickson, who did good works with his approaches. Calof said it, too, that he learned the limitations of Erickson's model. (Sadly, for me anyway, he doesn't go on about what those limitations are. I would like to know, where he thinks the limitations are.)
Also, as much as you as a therapist might prefer one therapy over another or one method within a certain therapy over another, not every person responds to this one method the same positive way. That would be boring for therapists, too, because then they would all only learn this one kind of therapy and then treat everyone this same way and heal and help them that way. That would be boring, wouldn't it? As Betty Alice Erickson, one of Milton Erickson's daughters, put it in an interview with Paul Anwandter, "
You can't have a rule of psychotherapy that applies to everyone."
Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "Insist on yourself; never imitate. Your own gift you can present every moment with the cumulative force of a whole life's cultivation; but of the adopted talent of another, you have only an extemporaneous, half possession." That same way we should respect the other person's individuality and not want to be like one single other person. At its worst, we'll be a "cheap copy" quite literally and at best people would still talk about as as some one like xy.
When I was a kid I had a blanket with all sorts of squared samples sewed together. One beautiful, colourful patch work blanket. That's what I wold wish for us all, that we become a colourful patch work person in the things we do, our way of thinking and the way we look. Taking individual aspects of many, different people and utilise them in a useful way. Everything else would be boring, cheap copies. Nobody needs those.
Until next blog,
sarah
No comments:
Post a Comment