The Fragments of our Personality: Confusion and Change

Where am I going? I don't quite know.
What does it matter where people go?
Down to the wood where the blue-bells grow-
Anywhere, anywhere. I don't know.

- A.A. Milne, When We Were Very Young

Whenever you’re minded to make a big change in your life – the desire to be more productive, say, or to quit drinking after years of abuse – it doesn’t take long to experience a sensation of still being tied down to old behavioural patterns, like echoes of the former self breaching the trenches of change that you’re trying to enforce on yourself.

Whether we put these echoes down to habit, learned behaviour, or sheer human weakness, the result is the same: the self that we convince ourselves has steadfastness or consistency turns out to contain cracks that run deeper than we might care to admit. It’s as though there are different selves competing for dominance over our behaviour that can be difficult to navigate, and they frequently raise the question of who we “really” are.

But change in our self, of course, occurs naturally. You might live for decades not noticing much of a change on a day-to-day basis, and yet find yourself at 70 not even recognising who you were at 20. Yes, you have vague recollections of what you were doing, but everything is shrouded in a shade; the memories are so strange and different that they might as well not be true. Sylvia Plath captures this sensation of ageing acutely in “Mirror”:

[...]
I see her back, and reflect it faithfully.
She rewards me with tears and an agitation of hands.
I am important to her. She comes and goes.
Each morning it is her face that replaces the darkness.
In me she has drowned a young girl, and in me an old woman
Rises toward her day after day, like a terrible fish.

Plath portrays it here as being inevitable, consistent, terrible, like a death of the former self and the anticipation of yet more change. I have written elsewhere about the falsehood of memories, so I won’t dwell on that, but this perceived decay of the self is closely related.

Such a sense of decay increases the more abrupt or intense the change is felt to be. The natural ageing process feels strong because of the sheer amount of time that has given rise to many small changes; deliberate attempts at change are a struggle because it works against “what we are used to”, as it were. But what if there is a quick, unintentional change? 

Rapid change can happen when there are major turning points in life – losing a loved one, or getting laid off from a job we cherished – and this can feel like the opening of a rift. Beliefs formerly held to be true seem to be false; we are treading new ground and might perceive novelty as a threat. Recent memories of who we were just days ago may seem strangely distant. There may be anxiety or shame attached to the person we used to be; or, more positively, there might also be feelings of pride or accomplishment if we move beyond those versions of ourselves. 

Change is of course transformative, but no matter if good or bad, it is always a messy process, simply because we are messy beings ourselves, with complicated relations to who we are. Trying to live with that confusion, and learning to cover the cracks with a lasting solution, is one of life’s great struggles.

It is therefore not surprising that one of the great themes of art is this struggle with the self. John Clare’s haunting “I Am!”, a poem written while he was incarcerated in the Northampton General Lunatic Asylum, is particularly apt:

I am—yet what I am none cares or knows;
My friends forsake me like a memory lost:
I am the self-consumer of my woes—
They rise and vanish in oblivious host,
Like shadows in love’s frenzied stifled throes
And yet I am, and live—like vapours tossed

Into the nothingness of scorn and noise,
Into the living sea of waking dreams,
Where there is neither sense of life or joys,
But the vast shipwreck of my life’s esteems;
Even the dearest that I loved the best
Are strange—nay, rather, stranger than the rest.

Although the speaker here reaffirms a sense of his being, there is a clear sense of fragmentation and loss of self as he struggles to grasp what, exactly, he is. It ends on a note of death – though what really is sought for is peace by any means:

I long for scenes where man hath never trod
A place where woman never smiled or wept
There to abide with my Creator, God,
And sleep as I in childhood sweetly slept,
Untroubling and untroubled where I lie
The grass below—above the vaulted sky.

What we really feel when reading this poem is a yearning for an end to the confusion and strife, and a return to a more innocent time of persistence, clarity, and order – and be that in death. 

Other works of art display the sense of unease and fragmentation without bringing in the yearning desire. Dalí’s The Burning Giraffe is a beautiful example of this:

Exploring the cracks in our self-image is likely a never-ending process, but it does highlight that our fractured personalities are a fundamental part of what makes us human. Reconciling the different parts of ourselves is a universal experience and a daily struggle. To take the words of John Addison out of context, “we are not human beings, we are human becomings.” The end-result might very well be one that we experience at the end of T S Eliot’s The Waste Land:

I sat upon the shore
Fishing, with the arid plain behind me
Shall I at least set my lands in order?
London Bridge is falling down falling down falling down
Poi s’ascose nel foco che gli affina
Quando fiam uti chelidon—O swallow swallow
Le Prince d’Aquitaine à la tour abolie
These fragments I have shored against my ruins
Why then Ile fit you. Hieronymo’s mad againe.
Datta. Dayadhvam. Damyata.
                  Shantih     shantih     shantih

Existing and Loving in Mark Strand’s Poetry

In the beginning of Samuel Beckett’s Murphy, the titular character has tied himself naked to a chair in the dark, rocking back and forth, doing absolutely nothing beside. This is a kind of dream-state for him. He’s a dreadful solipsist, refusing ever to take any responsibility for himself or others, attempting to come as close to some form of non-existence as possible. Without taking a drastic final step, this is to him the height of being.

Of course this is the mindset of a fictional character, but that doesn’t mean there is no such thing in reality. There are enough people who just exist as they do, living from one day into the next, with no real sense of progression. This is perfectly justifiable. Mark Strand in his poem “Coming to This” captures the same sort of spirit in a couple that has become passive later on in their lives:

[…]
And now we are here.
The dinner is ready and we cannot eat.
The meat sits in the white lake of its dish.
The wine waits.
Coming to this
has its rewards: nothing is promised, nothing is taken away.
We have no heart or saving grace,
no place to go, no reason to remain.

The obvious benefit of not tackling life head-on is a pure absence of pain. There is little loss since there is little of value; a valueless life can be the same thing as a painless life. And so even the end of life itself can be faced  since it doesn’t matter either way. Suicide doesn’t become desirable, necessarily, but the whole question of whether that’s a valid way out receives a strange answer: “meh.”

But the stages one must progress through to reach such a state are many. I guess a sort-of switch-off of the self: if pain becomes overbearing and there is no way out of it, switching off the emotions is not an uncommon defence. After all, if I don’t feel anything, you can’t hurt me. It’s as simple as that. And it’s a life that by definition doesn’t risk anything – a life quite opposed to the drive most people feel in some form. Again, Strand writes beautifully on this in “Keeping Things Whole”:

[…]
When I walk
I part the air
and always
the air moves in
to fill the spaces
where my body’s been.
We all have reasons
for moving.
I move
to keep things whole.

It’s like an inner drive just to do stuff. This is in no way a celebration of the more frantic capitalism-driven burnout-culture we live in, but just an observation that humans, in general, wish to act, whether it be for pleasure, work, or just out of a stale sense of duty. The feeling of boredom is abhorrent: many people would do anything to avoid it. One of the strong reasons we may feel a proclivity towards addiction – including addiction to entertainment – might very well be the desperate need to have the feeling of doing something, even if it is an illusion. Without it, we don’t feel whole, as Strand says.

But the issue here is the question of how to act, of what to do, and how to keep on doing it. The world is a terrifying place and uncertainty governs every step. On this, Strand is also vocal. His “Black Maps” highlights the difficulty of finding the right path:

[…]
Nothing will tell you
where you are.
Each moment is a place
you’ve never been.
You can walk
believing you cast
a light around you.
But how will you know?
The present is always dark.
[…]

And this is, in essence, part of the human condition. There is a drive in humans to keep going; to press on, always, to discover – to map things out – to produce, to create, always with the hope of filling the void of existence with something to do. I have written about this absurdity of existence before and Albert Camus’s solution in embracing this condition, though our concerns don’t end here. Strand actually offers a lovely view when facing one’s own existence along these lines in “Lines for Winter”:

Tell yourself
as it gets cold and gray falls from the air
that you will go on
walking, hearing
the same tune no matter where
you find yourself-
inside the dome of dark
or under the cracking white
of the moon’s gaze in a valley of snow.
Tonight as it gets cold
tell yourself
what you know which is nothing
but the tune your bones play
as you keep going. And you will be able
for once to lie down under the small fire
of winter stars.
And if it happens that you cannot
go on or turn back
and you find yourself
where you will be at the end,
tell yourself
in that final flowing of cold through your limbs
that you love what you are.

This would of course remind us of a winter poem by Wallace Stevens, although the tone is much more negative – “The Snow Man”

One must have a mind of winter
To regard the frost and the boughs
Of the pine-trees crusted with snow;
And have been cold a long time
To behold the junipers shagged with ice,
The spruces rough in the distant glitter
Of the January sun; and not to think
Of any misery in the sound of the wind,
In the sound of a few leaves,
Which is the sound of the land
Full of the same wind
That is blowing in the same bare place
For the listener, who listens in the snow,
And, nothing himself, beholds
Nothing that is not there and the nothing that is.

Both poems offer a vision of life with imagery relating to winter, both tackle the problem of existence, but while both contain the struggle to be and to act in the world, Stevens offers the more chilling nihilistic perspective, whereas Strand gives us a glimpse of the end – and that with an urge to love oneself. 

And indeed therein may lie the secret. In a social media-driven society where the divination of one’s narcissistic tendencies is ubiquitous in one large slice of the world, and self-righteous self-contempt in another, finding a healthy balance of self-love and love for others can seem particularly difficult to achieve. A lot of it has to do with the struggle we have with our thoughts. As Hamlet says in Shakespeare’s play when telling his former friends what he thinks of his home, “There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so. To me it is a prison.” There is no greater struggle – or more important struggle – than the struggle with one’s own self.

Murphy’s problem is, essentially, that he does not struggle with his self. His downfall comes when he works as a nurse at the Magdalen Mental Mercyseat hospital – a parody of Bethlem Royal Hospital – and struggles to keep afloat his solipsistic beliefs.

No – a life well lived would be one in which we act in a way that shows signs of improvement and growth in an effort to be content with what we have done. This isn’t measured by external achievement, but is very much a life that relies on our own journey with ourselves. And in the end, we may find satisfaction in meeting an end such as described by Strand in “In Celebration”:

You sit in a chair, touched by nothing, feeling
the old self become the older self, imagining
only the patience of water, the boredom of stone.
You think that silence is the extra page,
you think that nothing is good or bad, not even
the darkness that fills the house while you sit watching
it happen. You’ve seen it happen before. Your friends
move past the window, their faces soiled with regret.
You want to wave but cannot raise your hand.
You sit in a chair. You turn to the nightshade spreading
a poisonous net around the house. You taste
the honey of absence. It is the same wherever
you are, the same if the voice rots before
the body, or the body rots before the voice.
You know that desire leads only to sorrow, that sorrow
leads to achievement which leads to emptiness.
You know that this is different, that this
is the celebration, the only celebration,
that by giving yourself over to nothing,
you shall be healed. You know there is joy in feeling
your lungs prepare themselves for an ashen future,
so you wait, you stare and you wait, and the dust settles
and the miraculous hours of childhood wander in darkness.

Psychological Models, Transactional Analysis and a review of Thomas Harris’s ‘I’m OK – You’re OK’

Self-help vs Layman’s psychology

Among its many flaws, the issue with the money-grabbing and nefarious self-help industry is the fact that it will occasionally cherry pick – and sometimes even plagiarise – individual methods, statements, or concepts from superior works out there, which gives it an air of authority it simply doesn’t deserve. This is especially problematic when good publications introducing good concepts may then be mistaken for self-help books.

A mere rant against the self-help industry isn’t the point of this post. There are enough people who rage against it day and night, and rather than to add to the overwhelming tempest that tries to make a dent in the rocks, I’d rather use this space to point towards the use of psychological models and how they can – if properly understood – be helpful to any individual. Books that explain these concepts can be very useful.

Problems with psychological models

That being said, I understand completely if people take issue with psychological models. People rightly point out that they are ‘not scientific’. To use the most classical model of Freudian psychoanalysis, you don’t need to search far to find the difficulties. What exactly is the unconscious? Can we point to a place where it exists? What about the id, ego and superego? Freudian theories like the Oedipus complex sound neat but when you think about it, you’d be hard-pressed to find any solid proof for them. They are unfalsifiable, thereby unscientific.

The issue with all this is that the same can be said for many things we take for granted in everyday life – most importantly, the concept of selfhood. The self, too, cannot be traced back to any actual evidence. Of course Descartes had the idea of ‘I think, therefore I am,’ but scores of philosophers have criticised his finding – prominently among them Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, and Heidegger. The issue here is that it presupposes the ‘I’: the only thing that can be said for the concept is that ‘thinking is being done’ – but who or what is doing the thinking is unknown.

But this sort of thinking can quickly lead into a state of nihilism from which there is no escape. If any central concepts that were taken for granted end up being illusions, we may find ourselves in the same mindset that Macbeth finds himself in when he hears that his queen has died. In that moment, he states that life ‘is a tale / Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, / Signifying nothing’: a lot of faff over absolutely nothing.

Your philosophy, my philosophy…

Thankfully, however, life is not merely a set of scientific truths. In fact, in everyday human experience, little is less relevant than scientific reality. Such a view is materialistic: you only accept what is scientifically verifiable, you only judge according to objective standards. And yet you don’t have an issue with concepts such as the self, although they hold no more validity than concepts that you would reject out of hand. You certainly behave in a way as though the concept of self were important to you – why else bother with education, family, a career?

William Blake, Illustration from Europe – a Prophecy

This tells us that materialism is a philosophy like any other, and rejecting materialism is not the same as rejecting science – not even a little bit. It just involves an acknowledgement that as humans we experience life as a set of interconnected meaning, and not as a set of objective experiences. 

And this is where psychological models come in handy. Many of them might not be scientifically verifiable, but that doesn’t mean that they aren’t useful. As the word model suggests, they aren’t a carbon copy of existence; they don’t point to anything specific. But they are representations. They are metaphors that we use to gain a greater understanding over ourselves, and thereby help us improve ourselves. 

Transactional Analysis

One useful model I’ve learnt of recently is Transactional Analysis. It is a theory that was developed in the late 50s and 60s by Eric Berne and has its roots in Freudian psychoanalysis – although the core concepts deviate drastically.

The main premise of Transactional Analysis is the concept that each individual’s personality is split into three states, that of the Adult, Parent, and Child. At various times one of the three can become dominant, which then leads to a response along predictable lines that may or may not be pathological. That’s not to say that your consciousness switches between any of the three, but rather that your automatic response may deviate depending on which of the three parts of you is currently predominantly in ‘control.’

Image from https://www.simplypsychology.org/

The Child develops in the first couple of years of one’s life and consists mainly of feelings. This part of the personality is therefore usually triggered by feelings: when we are afraid or experience anxiety, but also when we’re in a playful mood and feel mischievous. We develop our Parent in our formative years by internalising dogmas that our parental figures say. Most conceptions of absolutes fall into this camp: believing that X must obviously be true, or that one should never do Y. Obviously the stronger the Parent is, the less freedom to act on our own behalf we have; a stronger Child would lead to frequent anxiety attacks or a lack of rational behaviour. 

The Adult is the one who should ideally often be in charge since it is able to reason rationally and understands when their personality is leaning in one or the other direction. This doesn’t mean it’s cold to emotion – that might be more in the realm of a tyrannical Parent – just that it has mastered itself. Awareness of one’s Child and Parent – and realising that everyone’s behaviour falls along these lines – can lead to a strengthened Adult.

Why even bother with Transactional Analysis?

Transactional Analysis is particularly useful because it provides a framework that puts people on an equal footing. There is no concept of ‘I know this way of thinking and therefore can tell you what to do or think.’ Instead, it is collaborative: teaching it can give multiple people a common language in which to communicate ideas about ourselves in the knowledge that everyone functions, more or less, in the same way without building unnecessary hierarchies. 

And yet it is only a model, and one of many. Its usefulness in therapy cannot really be overstated, but it wouldn’t be applicable to each case. Any case of addiction, for instance, can’t really easily be cured with it. Some people may find themselves being resistant to it – as individuals we have our own way of thinking, and this particular metaphor may not help the patient, or else, they may not be metaphorically inclined and can’t connect to models in general, and would prefer a more clear-cut method. 

I’m OK – You’re OK

The strongest book I have read on the subject is Thomas Harris’s I’m OK – You’re OK. It is a lovely little gem of a book that was published in 1967. Unlike Eric Berne’s Games People Play which hasn’t aged particularly well (partly due to stereotyping and overly analytical takes on concepts), Harris’s book still holds its own.

Its purpose is to introduce the world to Transactional Analysis. Written with non-professionals in mind, the concepts are generally laid out in a way that is easy enough to understand, and yet the subject matter is treated in a clear, straightforward way with plenty of examples to make the point. 

Parts of it do feel very much of its time. There is still a reference to parental figures slapping their kids as a normal way of punishing them (even if this is put down as the tyrannical Parent being in action), and it speaks of electroconvulsive therapy as a common way of treating certain conditions – and other things are generally uncomfortable (on a side note, electroconvulsive therapy is still in use, though only rarely). 

But none of this really undermines the point of the premise, which is to teach people a method that can be a very helpful tool to people. At times Harris does tend to ramble on and go into too much detail regarding certain very specific examples, but by and large it flows neatly.

The title refers to four particular statuses of being that Transactional Analysis refers to – I’m Not OK – You’re OK; I’m Not OK – You’re Not OK; I’m OK – You’re not OK; and I’m OK – You’re OK. The theory is that we are all born in the first group, and in an ideal situation we would want to overcome that situation and reach the last group since that is harmonious and makes for a good attitude towards life.

Image from www.trainerslibrary.org

This statement is based on the assumption that we are all born with an initial trauma: that of being born, leaving the warm comfort of the womb, and finding ourselves in a cold, unfeeling world that we don’t understand. We see the caregiver as OK since they – ideally – treat us well, but we don’t feel as though we ourselves are OK – and so the initial state, according to Harris, is that we need to behave in a way that we can approach being OK. Through the use of Transactional Analysis and a belief that we can all feel ourselves to be OK, Harris believes that we can all reach a status of equilibrium in which we accept everyone – including ourselves – as OK.

Towards the end of the book, Harris also becomes overly optimistic in his conclusions. According to him, if everyone were to learn Transactional Analysis, then the world would be a much better, safer and kinder place. Whether or not that is true cannot be said because it is simply impossible – it’s quite clear, at this stage, that it won’t ever be more than a good tool for some individuals to improve their own lives.

Nevertheless, credit where it’s due – it is certainly worth a read, and Transactional Analysis is well worth a consideration for anyone who has an interest in psychology and finding a framework that can be useful in thinking about oneself.

Did you find this article useful? If so, why not leave a comment, or else share it on social media by clicking on one of the buttons below?

Taking the road together and testing things as we go along

A golden sky above the fields,

a warm and soft breeze;

here we walked, holding hands

(you always used to stroke my palm)

heading towards a blue strand.

I felt like I could leap

from star to star, gathering,

on my way, both the sun

and the moon, and mingle them

in a test tube.

I don’t know why I’m constantly

reminded of your face, your warmth,

stupid details like how you sipped your tea,

or how you leaned your body close to mine

when we strolled on a path through the woods –

almost stumbling over our feet.

I’m not sure where I’m going with this –

I guess I just wanted to let you know

that after all this time, I realise

how hard it is being alone,

with nobody to lean on,

and making tea for one,

each time I wake up.

Published in Acumen 99, January 2020; also featured as a guest poem on Acumen in January 2020.

Taken from Desire to Water

In the beginning there was desire,

and desire became Will –

like tulips chasing after the sun,

we’d chase each other for a warm embrace.

Bring smoke, bring flame, bring storm,

and every trial and travesty

(and we learnt the meaning of the words:

“we would sooner have the void for purpose

than be void of purpose”).

Having braved the smoke, the flame, the storm,

we find ourselves still standing here –

not without our own challenges, but

with a bit of newly-gained wisdom.

And now that we’re here at the coast,

looking out to the open sea,

one foot in the water, Love, please let me know:

what is it that you see in the distance?

Published in Acumen 99, January 2020.