I mainly want to say that I think it’s totally reasonable of
Alice Miller to be unresponsive to your [Daniel Mackler’s] essay and even
dismissive.
Here is a woman who has spent much of her life swimming
upstream, going against the flow, fighting against the going paradigm.
Simultaneously, she is trying to heal her own wounds; she must feel awfully
vulnerable much of the time. So here she is trying to stand up to constant
criticism while at the same time carrying around all these unhealed wounds.
And here you come along and attack her, yet again. It’s true
that you also say how much you have learned from her, how influential she has
been for you. But your primary purpose with the essay seems to be to harp on
how she’s NOT PERFECT.
Sorry for the all caps shouting, but I want to make a point
that by writing your essay with this accusatory tone, you are practicing
exactly the same sort of critical, judgmental behavior that you say is so
damaging. Somehow you expect this wounded, damaged soul, Alice Miller, to be
immune to your criticism; for her not to be sensitive to your attacks.
In my experience, people go deaf when they feel attacked.
They don’t respond with an open-minded desire to learn. I imagine, given her
life history and the fact that her theories are probably subject to constant
criticism—at the same time that they are also praised by many—, she’s
sensitive. Who wouldn’t be?
If I were you, I’d go back and try to read your essay with a
mind to how it might feel to be Alice Miller and read your words.
Given the feelings that your essay might invoke in her,
imagine her trying to remain detached and un-triggered by old wounds. No matter
how successful you might be in remaining detached when people make comments,
this doesn’t mean she should be able to be equally detached. She’s under
constant fire, from all sides; she’s getting old, and probably worn out from
the battle. Despite all her efforts, and all her insights, she hasn’t been able
to truly get the healing she needs. She’s also a woman in a field where most of
the heavy hitters have been men. Getting recognition and not being heard as
“shrill” is a battle women have to face on top of everything else.
And you might think here about the fine line between
detachment and dissociation, which you’ve mentioned elsewhere on other topics.
I think there might be a little bit of a disconnect inside you about your
ability to remain “dispassionate” and take on criticism, and recognizing that
others (such as Alice Miller) may be still so painfully connected to the old
wounds that they cannot be dispassionate.
Can you cut her some slack? Not be so hard on her? She’s
done amazing things. No one is perfect. Life is a series of course corrections.
And perhaps you might even consider what parts of your own
unhealed wounds you are projecting onto her in your demands for perfection. Are
you insisting that she be the perfect mother you never had? I would perhaps
question your motives in writing your essay as a “critique,” rather than simply
saying “Here’s what I learned from Alice Miller’s amazing work. And here are
some ways that I think maybe we could go even further.”
Can you imagine writing what you did, extending her
theories, going beyond where she went without attacking her in the process? If
you were able to do this, I think she would feel validated, appreciated. You
would be building on what she did do, what she did accomplish, rather than
focusing on the areas where she was human and failed to be perfect.
If you choose to re-read your essay with an eye toward
greater compassion toward Alice Miller, you might notice that using “Limits” in
the title started off on the wrong foot to get her to listen to you with an
open mind. You might do some word counts to see how often you use language that
most people would perceive as critical if they were on the receiving end. Try
to put yourself in her shoes.
And I realize you didn’t write the essay as a direct letter
to her, and maybe never thought about whether she’d ever read it. You were
processing your own needs, which is cool.
I think it’d be an interesting, and revealing, exercise for
you to try to say what you think about her in a non-judgmental way.” Mimsy
“Daniel-
I enjoy most things you have to say and I am forever
grateful that I was sent to Alice Miller after watching your YouTube videos. I
do however find most of your great work to precisely that- Alice Millers. And
that parts where you disagree you seem to be making broad over-generalizations
and sticky conclusions.
The two reviews I have read on here also don't give any
substance to the books of which you reviewed- I think Cesar has a point. You
seem to use this discussion to attack Miller, and not the points made in the
book. You seem to be making a review on her integrity.
I also am unsure how you determine that you are completely
enlightened. How can you know you are not making the same "hubris"
assumption as Miller? Can anyone be fully enlightened? How can one determine
when they are fully enlightened? And if you aren't enlightened, then by your
own words aren't you abusing your readers? And you abused your past patients
before your enlightenment?
As for the fact that Alice Miller has disclosed
her whole life makes her easy to attack from someone that hasn't to near the
extent. Also your attacks on procreation and whether or not parents can have
children is rather mute, considering you don't plan to have any and your stance
on homosexuality.” Mark Twain
No comments:
Post a Comment