Gentle Expression
Con passione ma non troppo
The hallmark of the gentle levels of expression
now to be discussed is simply that no significant disturbance is created. There is no other
limitation on the means used to represent and convey the feelings. Importantly, all of the prerequisites
described later under Facilitated Intense Catharsis must still be met. However, that is usually
quite easy to do at this level.
Gentle Methods of Expression
Anything which serves as a way of representing
and conveying a feeling can be a useful method of expression – as long as it is safe for
all concerned. So, while I will mention a number of useful methods, I am not suggesting that the
list is complete.
If the feeling is conveyed to one or more other
people who are present, the interpersonal aspects of the process make a valuable contribution.
However, expression of a feeling in the absence of an audience still makes it more accessible
to the person's conscious mind. It also has symbolic significance, in the sense that the feeling
has been put out into a wider context.
Private acknowledgement
This is the very
quietest and gentlest form which externalisation can take. It cannot be very clearly separated
from the previous E – it is a transitional phenomenon between exploration and expression.
Acknowledging a feeling necessarily involves interpreting it sufficiently for it to be accessible
to thought, and conveying it to that part of the mind which thinks. So, in that sense, it is a
form of expression within the mind – as well as an aspect of exploration. (The form in which
it is accessed by thought need not be verbal, of course.)
Whatever E we
classify it under, private acknowledgement is an important step. Before a feeling has been consciously
acknowledged, it may be a fairly vague and uncertain impression – which is relatively easy
to ignore. Afterwards, it usually remains fully conscious, which makes it harder to ignore –
and easier to express more fully.
Putting it in words
Words are of considerable
significance to the conscious mind. Though private acknowledgement is possible while a feeling
remains entirely non-verbal, translating it into words – and then thinking about it verbally
– confers additional benefit. It often makes it seem more real and more accessible. It also
makes it easier to remember what is learned, if there is a verbal memory link between the feeling
and any insights gained.
Saying the words
Putting a feeling
into words, as above, does not necessarily mean that you will speak those words. But it does open
up the possibility of doing so – either to yourself, or to another person. Saying them to
another person is discussed under the next heading. However, even if you are alone, saying the
words out loud adds an extra dimension to the externalisation process.
When a feeling
is first interpreted for the benefit of the conscious mind, the beginning of externalisation occurs.
When a verbal representation is considered by the conscious mind, the value of the process is
increased. But when the words go out via the mouth, a further and slightly different experience
of externalisation occurs. And when they come back in through the ears, their perception may be
slightly different again. Any or all of these forms of expression can add value to the process.
Talking about it
Talking is the
most popular of all the gentle forms of expression – and deservedly so, because it combines
the simplicity of an everyday activity, the benefits of externalisation and often also the insight
of another person who is not directly affected by the feelings. Added to those advantages, there
may be a certain amount of visual, sonic, tactile or kinetic communication, as discussed below.
This can turn the humble conversation into an interactive symphony!
Simple opportunities
for talking about feelings might include a yarn over a beer, a chat over a cuppa, or indeed any
conversation, whether planned or not, where one person is willing to listen while another person's
feelings are described. And, as will be reiterated from time to time, if you happen to be the
person listening, your contribution can be improved immensely by good communication skills –
and even more immensely by a non-judgmental attitude.
Writing it down
Writing is another
simple technique that allows verbal representation and externalisation of a feeling without creating
any disturbance. It can be remarkably helpful to write down how you feel. Even wondering what
on earth to write can be helpful. Then, after you have written something, reading what you have
written usually reminds you of still more feelings. You may find yourself using much more paper
than expected.
When you are finished
with something you have written about your feelings, it is usually best to destroy it. Until then,
keep it in a safe place. You probably don't want it to be read by anyone who happens to find it.
Even if it seems fairly innocuous, feelings taken out of context are easily misconstrued. And,
who knows – you might be famous, one day. If so, every word you ever wrote will suddenly
be worth publishing!
Non-verbal expression
Non-verbal communication
is a very large topic, but I will only comment briefly about it here. There is a footnote under
Facilitation of Expression about a forthcoming e-booklet, which provides a brief introduction
to the basic aspects of communication. But there are also plenty of much larger books about this
subject.
There are many
possible visual methods of expression. Two examples are just doodling on paper, or drawing simple
pictures – perhaps with coloured crayons. The images may be reality based, abstract or a
mixture of the two. Facial expressions and non-specific gestures are also examples of visual communication.
Gestures with known meanings are more like words, but they do have a visual component as well.
Sonic methods
include vocal, instrumental and miscellaneous ways of making sounds. Vocal sonic expression is
often added to speech, by way of variations in volume, pitch, timbre, speed and rhythm. However,
various sorts of vocal sonic expression, including shouting, screaming, singing, keening and wailing,
can be done with or without words.
Tactile methods
include playing in a sandbox, modelling with clay or any other soft medium, or modifying various
other substances in any safe way. Finger painting has a tactile element to it, as well as the
visual one. More complex activities like carpentry or mechanical engineering, however, provide
only limited opportunities for expression of feelings.
Kinetic methods
include expressive movements such as clenching the fists, various limb and trunk movements, grimacing,
beating something inanimate, or any tantrum-related behaviour. The latter two are particularly
important in externalising powerful feelings, and are discussed under Facilitated Intense Catharsis.
Dance can also be used to express feelings, but it is easy to pay too much attention to the dance
and too little to the feelings. (Most kinetic methods also include a visual element – or
sometimes a sonic element.)
Some of the above
methods result in the production of an artefact, most commonly a picture. Discussing this can
sometimes add value to the process. However, no artistic ability is necessary in order to employ
non-verbal methods of expression, any more than it is for verbal expression. It is the act of
expression that is healing, not the beauty of the artefact.
Crying is a unique
non-verbal method of expression, so I will give it a heading of its own…
Crying
Crying is a special
example of non-verbal expression. It is partly kinetic, in that various contortions of face and
body often accompany it, and partly unique, in that its defining feature is the production of
tears. It is often the first gentle form of emotional expression employed, and it frequently accompanies
other methods – including intense methods. So, while it has been placed last in this list,
it is anything but least in importance.
Crying is a natural
expression of sadness, and a very effective one. It includes instinctive and learned behavioural
elements. It can conveniently be done either alone, or in company. Tears are "acceptable"
to most people. However, crying can upset some people, usually when it stimulates their own unfinished
business. This is discussed under the next heading.
Crying while watching
emotive movies is a time honoured example of this method of expression being used effectively
without another person to facilitate the process. Other communication media, such as books, also
provide triggers for buried emotions. So does sifting through one's own memories.
While it is true
that tears contain endorphins, which are intrinsic neurochemicals with analgesic and tranquillising
properties, the main value of crying in our current context is probably its instinctive use as
a way of externalising feelings – especially sadness. This has been known and used throughout
the participant's life. It has also been known and used throughout recorded history – and
presumably before.
Facilitation of Gentle Expression
By facilitation,
I mean helping another person to externalise feelings. This is sometimes helpful at any level
of intensity of externalisation. It is discussed further under Facilitated Intense Catharsis.
However, I will say a little about it here.
Communication
skills, which are of very great importance to every aspect of helping, are discussed elsewhere and will not be addressed specifically in this book. Apart from those
skills, one particular quality in the listener is paramount, and that is the quality of being
non-judgmental. Some of this quality is helpful, more is healing – and even more,
is even better.
Another essential
for the expression of emotions is a continuing supply of the reassurance, permission and validation
previously discussed under Encourage. However, permission to share feelings with a particular
person or persons must never be confused with a licence to inflict feelings on any person
who happens to be present.
A related issue
is that permission to share feelings with another person does not imply permission to direct
those feelings at the other person – or to blame the other person in any way for
the underlying distress. Some professional therapists might be comfortable in the role of virtual
scapegoat, with agreed limits, but friends and relatives hardly ever are – which is not
surprising, as it is neither logical, fair nor easy to tolerate.
The underlying
principle here is that the whole aim of the EEEEs process is to get rid of emotional pain in a
generally beneficial way. This is not achieved by dumping it onto other people. As previously
discussed, it is best achieved by externalising it in a safe way, in a safe place, at an agreed
time and with the permission and co-operation of everyone who is directly or indirectly affected.
On the other hand,
it is frequently necessary to express antipathy which is directed at a particular person. This
paradox is best resolved by ensuring that the person is not present when that work is done. And
even if acquaintances of the person are present, it is best to change names and modify circumstances
while vocalising. You will still know who you mean!
The management
of self-directed anger deserves special mention. It is a very important issue to work on, but
working on it sometimes distresses bystanders, for an understandable, though erroneous, reason.
It may be felt that the person externalising might be harmed by the distressingly powerful and
intensely critical abuse which is directed at their own self.
However, the fact
that it is distressingly powerful is the proof that it already exists within their own pool of
pain. Now that it is coming out, there will be less of it bottled up, and more of it accessible
for the next E (evaluation). The person will consequently be at progressively less risk
of suffering psychological or physical harm – not more. (That does not alter the fact that,
in some cases, expert help may still be necessary.)
Another form of
expression which sometimes distresses bystanders is crying. I mentioned this in passing under Methods of Expression, but
I will address it here, because it has to do with various aspects of facilitation. Bystanders
often try to "comfort" a person who is crying – in a way rather analogous to putting
sticking plaster over an abscess.
They say things
like "Come on dear, calm down, don't cry, it will all be OK, dry those tears, let's see your
beautiful smile, everything will be alright, let's have a hug,
there, that's better, now let's get a drink into you – and if you can't sleep tonight, just
ask the wife for some of her tablets, the doc reckons they'd knock an elephant out".
This may be partly
due to a misguided notion that, if the crying stops, the problem has been solved. It is also part
of most people's conditioning, that comfort should be offered in at least some of the ways mentioned,
as a more or less routine response. However, in many cases it probably also reflects the fact
that the "comforter" has some unfinished business, which is being stimulated by witnessing
the tears – and which the "comforter" does not wish to face.
Crying, like any
other form of expression, requires the permission of both self and bystanders. Some people have
great difficulty giving themselves permission to cry. Males, especially, have often been strongly
conditioned against crying from early childhood. A person who is already crying has obviously
got past the barrier of the first permission – their own. But the "comforter"
is effectively withholding the second permission – and very strongly arguing for reversal
of the first.
So, if you want
to be helpful to someone who is crying, or appears likely to cry, don't tell them to stop the
very thing that is most likely to do them good. Just let them know that you are there, and offer
tissues (whether needed or not, within reason).
If you think words
are necessary, say something short like "let it out" or "let the tears out"
– after that, say the minimum necessary to encourage continuation of the process. A single
word (or tissue) from time to time should suffice. Sometimes, just being there is sufficient.
Also, unless requested,
don't hug a person who is in the middle
of crying, or externalising feelings in any other way. Although a hug is comforting – indeed,
because it is comforting – it can be counterproductive at this time. When emotions are pouring
out, a hug usually slows the flow – and often stops it altogether. On the other hand, some
people might expect a hug, and feel hurt if it does not materialise. Close attention to non-verbal
clues may be helpful, but it is not always possible to tell.
Any other physical
contact, like a pat on the back or holding the person's hand, can have a similar effect to a hug.
Being nearby is all the connection that you need, to be helpful to someone who is expressing feelings.
Close proximity, within usual social limits, is rarely a problem – it is touch that seems
to cause this effect.
When the externalisation
of feelings is complete, however, hugs can be one valuable way of providing validation. Among
many other things, a hug shows that the person has not become repulsive as a result of their self-disclosures.
This is often very valuable, because the expectation of rejection may be strong, especially after
working on guilt or shame.
However, not everybody
wants to be hugged after externalising feelings – just as not everybody wants to be hugged
in other situations. If the answer is not clear from non-verbal signals, it is better to ask than
to remain uncertain, because, as mentioned above, the person who has just shared feelings may
be in an unusually vulnerable state.
Calming Catharsis –
Decrescendo e rallentando
It hardly needs
stating that, so far, I have been exclusively considering ways to encourage, and certainly not
to stifle, the precious process of externalisation. However, there are occasions when it is necessary
to put a damper on the expression of emotions, simply because the conditions for its safe continuation
cannot be met at the time.
The essence of
those conditions, which you probably know off by heart by now, is that externalisation must be
practised in a safe way, in a safe place, at an agreed time and with the permission and co-operation
of everyone who is directly or indirectly affected. (These requirements will be discussed
in detail later, under Facilitated Intense Catharsis.)
While the gentle
methods described above are always important, and often sufficient, either the method or its intensity
may sometimes be perceived as inadequate to the task. It may not seem possible to represent the
emotions involved in any of those gentle ways. In such cases, the feelings might just remain bottled
up.
Alternatively,
there may be a spontaneous tendency for the strong feelings to come out in noisy and potentially
disturbing ways, such as shouting, screaming, swearing and hitting things. Unless such an outburst
is managed with a degree of care and skill, it may escalate, and could sometimes result in violence.
As we will see
later under Facilitated Intense Catharsis, everything except the violence might be "just
what the doctor ordered" – and the violence can be avoided. But it depends entirely
on the situation. Screaming and swearing in the middle of a violin solo, in a packed concert hall,
would create nothing but discord. Whereas, under the right conditions – which will be described
later – screaming and swearing just creates the healing noise previously referred to as
being "like Mozart".
Externalising
anger at a bus stop, by abusing the other passengers and kicking panels out of the bus shelter,
might get a person assaulted, arrested, or even admitted to a psychiatric unit under a compulsory
treatment order. On the other hand, expression of the same anger, in a safe way, in a suitable
environment, could start a process of emotional healing which might ultimately lead to improvements
which are simply not realised by any other method.
So the "volume"
of externalisation clearly needs to be turned down in some situations – but this does not
mean that noisy and vigorous externalisation of emotions is impossible. It just means that it
cannot safely proceed until the prerequisites already stated, and discussed under the next heading,
are met.
Adjustment of
the volume is the function of a person who is present in a helping role. This might be you –
it might be anyone. It could even be a passing policeman. However, possibly because of their frequent
encounters with criminals, some policemen are inclined to treat noisy emotional catharsis in a
cell (not recommended). All the more reason to get in first.
It is a bonus
if the noisy person also has some understanding of appropriate externalisation, but this situation
is more likely to be encountered when that is not the case. Therefore, if you are present and
you want to help, you will almost certainly have to take the initiative.
If you accept
the role, you probably already possess the most important prerequisite for it, which is an urge
to help. Having that urge, you will surely not have missed the importance of a non-judgmental
attitude, which has been stressed frequently in these pages. And assuming that you are also possessed
of a little common sense, you are off to a very good start.
However, you could
still be completely out of your depth. The qualities needed in this situation are almost identical
to those discussed under Facilitators, in Facilitated Intense Catharsis. If you lack some of those
qualities, your attempts may only be partially successful. Indeed, they may be totally unsuccessful.
Not every problem has an immediate solution, after all.
The most important
thing is to avoid an adversarial situation. It is far better to agree, or to retreat, than to
find yourself in conflict with the very person you are trying to steer away from violence. Compromising
your own safety would only make matters worse for both of you. But before considering specific
tactics, let's look at some possible scenarios.
A disturbing situation
can arise from very innocent beginnings. You could have been listening while a person shared their
feelings in a way which at first caused you no concern at all. The change in atmosphere can develop
slowly, or it may be very sudden. However, if you have read this book, I hope it will never be
a complete surprise.
Sometimes, when
the gentle rain of feelings seems to be developing into an ugly storm, the strong emotions being
expressed can have powerful effects on you, too. You might be distressed by feelings from your
own pool of pain, which have been triggered by what you are now seeing and hearing. You could
easily start to feel afraid of the situation – or possibly of the person who is expressing
the feelings.
People who choose
to share their painful feelings with you, with your permission, are in fact very unlikely to be
a danger to you. However, your own anger or fear might sometimes pose a danger. And regardless
of your own feelings, the situation may be very disturbing to other people who are present. As
a result, they may also act in ways which make matters worse.
Noisy externalisation
can be problematic in various ways. For example, what are you to do if your friend, who has been
crying quietly about various aspects of an impending divorce, suddenly exhibits many of the characteristics
of a nuclear missile? Especially if your room is next to the Vice-Chancellor's office, and she
is currently entertaining the Governor and three major benefactors. What can you do?
In many cases,
the externalisation of feelings can be reduced in intensity by the sensible use of your own personal
resources. I have previously mentioned some ways of encouraging
expression, though this is discussed more fully under Facilitated Intense Catharsis. I have also
mentioned that asking people to calm down, begging them to stop crying, telling them that everything
will be alright and giving them a hug is usually totally disastrous – if you want them
to express feelings.
Well, now that
you don't want the feelings expressed, two broad approaches are immediately evident. First,
withhold or withdraw any previous encouragement to express them. Just look a bit uncomfortable,
like most people do when exposed to emotions, and suggest continuing the discussion later. That
is sometimes all that is necessary. But if not, then proceed to plan B – do all the usual
things that are alleged to "comfort" people when they are "upset". It's in
a good cause.
After that, it
may be possible to involve the person's intellect. If you try this too soon, you will just
find that their intellect is not in attendance. And if you do it in a judgmental way, there is
also a risk of stimulating anger. One good ploy is trying to engage the person in planning a suitable
time and place to work with the feelings later. In addition to making it clear that externalisation
is not being denied, just deferred, this requires some intellectual activity – which is
just what you want. Then a few more hugs, and you may be chatting about the weather.
If not, then time
will often work in your favour. Most fires die down eventually. Unfortunately, though, not all
fires die down quickly enough. Occasionally, a complication of the above scenario can occur, in
which emergency services become involved. And sometimes, they fail to understand the emotional
causes of the situation.
There is then
a risk that the distressed person could be restrained, bundled into an ambulance, transported
to a hospital emergency department, sedated, marooned on a stretcher, interrogated by a flock of medical students and possibly even admitted
to a psychiatric ward. I will now wax a little melodramatic about this scenario – so, if
you think I have already done that, perhaps you had better skip a few pages.
If the above is
happening to someone you are trying to help, it is very important to stay calm. Always obey police
officers, refrain from obstructing ambulance officers – and carefully avoid any movements
that might be misinterpreted as threatening. Spare a thought for the poor police officer. Think
of all the forms he or she will have to fill in, if you happen to get shot while attempting to
draw your deadly mobile phone.
But as soon as
you can, explain that the person is distressed by the recollection of terrible events, rather
than being mentally ill or possessed of any felonious intent. Depending on the circumstances,
you could also explain that vigorous expression of emotions was advised by "the doctor"
– and just got a bit more vigorous than expected.
Offer to arrange
a taxi to take the person home, where you will look after them until they feel better –
or to take them to "the doctor", if preferred. But if you cannot prevent a transfer
to hospital, you could always tag along and explain the situation to the staff there. If so, try
to discourage the administration of antipsychotic medication – in this situation, there
will be no beneficial effect to balance against the risk of side effects (and the latter is not
trivial).
Sometimes, it
is difficult to escape being "sedated" for emotional distress. It is less likely, though,
if the patient firmly states "I refuse to have an injection". You could make a note
of that – dated and signed, of course. If you print NOTES MADE AT THE TIME clearly across
the top, and then ask the doctor to check that you have the date correct, it should be noticed.
If that is not
sufficient, I guess you could make a very polite enquiry about the consent procedure currently
in use – which is sure to be printed in a policy manual quite nearby. Or ask the address
of the hospital's Ethics Committee, seeing you have such a particular interest in Human Rights,
and would value the committee's opinions so highly. None of that will help much if a compulsory
treatment order has been made, of course.
You will certainly
not be popular, if you pester the staff members in any of the ways suggested above. However, if
you refrain from explaining the distinction between negligence and felony, perhaps those same staff members will agree that you have been quite
restrained, in the circumstances. Perhaps.
Of course, in
other circumstances, antipsychotic medication may be an essential part of treatment. But here,
we are considering an emotional catharsis – not a psychosis. OK, perhaps we are considering
it in an overly dramatic way, too. If it's any consolation, the hypothetical situation in question
was very nearly edited out completely. I couldn't decide whether it was comical, ridiculous, tragic,
or all three. On reflection, I think it is all three. But perhaps it can serve to illustrate three
points which, though not at all dramatic, are still important…
First, the externalisation
of emotions can easily have complications – whether we go looking for them, or not. Second,
working with emotions under optimal conditions, though obviously preferable, is not always possible.
And third, regardless of the conditions, something unexpected can always occur – in which
case, damage control is sometimes the best that can be achieved, at least initially.
Usually, though,
it is possible to gain the co-operation of a person in need of emotional catharsis, and postpone
it until the necessary prerequisites can be met. Under the next heading, I will discuss one way
of meeting the prerequisites for powerful emotional catharsis. As mentioned earlier, there are
many shades of intensity between gentle expression and intense catharsis, but I will leave them
to the reader's imagination.
(Click the number of a footnote to return
to its reference in the text)
|