The Sovereign Archetype – Interview

 

This is the transcript of an interview by Carolyn Clitheroe, a psychotherapy student who has developed an interest in Shadow Work. In relation to her studies she interviewed Marianne about the Sovereign archetype. The interview took place in the Green Room in Frome, Somerset in July 2017 and focuses on the inner Sovereign. The discussions are wide-ranging and a variety of topics relating to the Sovereign are discussed –  self compassion, authority and leadership, the inner child, trauma, joy and more. Inevitably the other three archetypes – the Lover, the Warrior and the Magician – are also spoken about, since all four archetypes are intimately related. Below is a simple diagram showing the archetype displays in the room which are referred to in the talk, and giving a brief description of the qualities of each archetype. This diagram may help you to get more from reading the interview. For a video giving more detail about each archetype please follow these links:

Sovereign                 Lover                   Magician                 Warrior

 

Marianne Hill interviewed by Carolyn Clitheroe (Sampritti)

July 2017 at The Green Room, Frome, Somerset.

 

C:  I’m looking around the room and that’s obviously the Sovereign corner (pointing to one of the displays in the corner of the room) and I suppose because of the work that I’ve done with you, when I think of Sovereign I think of it as kind of in the middle, directing things. Is that in any way accurate or is it because I particularly love the Sovereign archetype that I see it like that?

 

M:  The Sovereign is, as the name suggests, in charge of everything, so the Sovereign’s rightful place is to be in charge in the same way that a parent is in charge of their family or of their children or, for example, that the ‘Sovereign’ is in charge of their kingdom. I’ve never heard it referred to as being in the middle, because we also say that each of the four archetypes has equal importance and is equally necessary. So although the role of the Sovereign is to be in charge – that isn’t necessarily any more important than the role of the Lover over there (pointing to the Lover display) to be in connection or to be vulnerable. Maybe with our western take on things we might think that the one in charge is the most important!

 

C:  Interesting, yes. Where does the Warrior Archetype come into it then?

 

M:  Well the Warrior takes action, so the Sovereign is no use without the Warrior to do her bidding. In the same way that an old fashioned kind of Queendom where the Queen would decide she wanted certain territories and she would send her warriors off to gain those territories. The Warrior takes the action. So we see we have something called the Mission Loop which works between the Sovereign and the Warrior – where the Sovereign is in charge, she has the heart, the morality, the wisdom to make decisions, to decide what needs to happen. And then she will tell the Warrior what to do and the Warrior will take action. And so in that way missions, or visions get carried out – with the Sovereign and the Warrior working together. So the Sovereign is no use without her Warrior..

 

C:  …Otherwise she would be almost sort of fangless or clawless? – That is the image I have of a Sovereign without real ‘oomph’ behind her.

 

M:  Yes and very ungrounded with lots of ideas and lots of enthusiasm but nothing actually happening.

 

C:  And so between the other archetypes are there other loops that have a name – what else is connected to the Sovereign?

 

M:  There’s another really important loop with the Lover which is called the Connection Loop, because if you think of Sovereign’s job as the parent, then the Lover carries the inner child – the vulnerable parts of us or the vulnerable parts of other people. So there’s a loop there where the Sovereign cares for, supports, accepts, nurtures and blesses the inner child. That can be our own inner child or vulnerable parts, or those of other people. Internally the Sovereign is taking care of, and looking after, our own vulnerable parts.

 

C:  So presumably the Sovereign can engage the Warrior in protecting the Lover?

 

M:  Yes

 

C:  And it can kind of triangulate in that way?

 

M:  Yes exactly, the Warrior’s job is to protect and the Sovereign’s job is to care for, to understand, to accept, to give unconditional love to those parts of ourselves and to those parts of others.

 

C:  On the flip side of that then, what are these loops like when they are going wrong?

 

M:  Well with the Mission Loop, if it’s only the Sovereign, if the Warrior isn’t online as we call it, then as we’ve said the Sovereign just is ungrounded – lots of ideas, lots of excitement maybe, lots of passion but it’s got no oomph behind it and nothing actually happens, nothing actually changes. If we just have the Warrior with no direction from the Sovereign then we can do a lot of hard work, a lot of action, but it’s not going anywhere, it’s not achieving anything – it’s a lot of action or busyness for the sake of it, with no direction.

 

C:  And then what about Lover without the Sovereign then? I’m imagining collapse or something like that – self pity maybe?

 

M:  Yes. I was just going to say it’s the abandoned child without a parent. I think what happens to the inner child when there is no Sovereign is that she doesn’t get to grow. So those wounded parts of us that have been stuck as a child without the Sovereign there don’t get to grow up and become integrated into the whole of us. They stay stuck as wounded parts at the age where we got wounded and they kind of got trapped in there.

 

C:  That’s interesting – that brings shame to mind and I remember you’ve talked about shame being something that can infiltrate anywhere.

 

M:  Yes but it’s very much to do with the Magician. Because shame is about fear. For most of us, if we’ve been wounded in childhood in a way that hasn’t been healed, it’s because the Sovereign hasn’t been there – the parental influence hasn’t been there, or the role model influence or the nurturing care – not necessarily just from a parent but someone playing that role. So we’ve been through our trauma and had to make sense of it in the way that we can – which tends to mean relying on our Magician because the Magician is the part that tries to keep us safe and deals with fear.

 

C:  And shame is part of keeping us safe – socially?

 

M:  Shame is part of keeping us safe because its a way of taking control of a scary situation. If a child is being abused for example then that’s terrifying: They’ve got someone way bigger than them, way more powerful than them doing things to them that they really shouldn’t be doing physically, emotionally, sexually. If the child was to sit with the terror of that, psychologically they would go under. So what is very common is that the Magician part of the child reframes it – which is the job of the Magician; to look at it differently and says ‘No, this is happening because theres something wrong with you – you’ve done something bad or wrong – that’s why this person is doing these things to you’.

 

C:  So then the person would keep going back to their Magician and keep trying to work out, cycling it round, trying to work out how they can adjust themselves?

 

M:  How they can hide their ‘badness’ or not be ‘bad’ – it gives them some control. Because if it’s them that’s bad, not this big scary person, then all they need to do is try and take control of themselves, try not to be ‘bad’, try not to do that again. And along with that of course comes this shame which is a feeling, a belief that there is something wrong with us, which isn’t actually true, but it serves a purpose in childhood when the Sovereign isn’t present. If a child has a trauma and they have a loving parent around them, that can mitigate a lot of that because they can understand and explain and let the child feel what they are feeling and then they know it wasn’t about them.

 

C:  I’m interested in theories of trauma and I’m trying to think of these four archetypes through that kind of lens. I think from your description I would associate Magician with dissociation.

 

M:  Yes, absolutely. Anything to keep safe. So dissociation is very common because the Warrior is completely not present in trauma.

 

C:  Really? – Oh because theres not enough safety to engage that aspect?

 

M:  Yes, that’s one of the definitions of trauma: that we carry it. If we can shake off trauma – the fight or flight response…

 

C:  …yes mobilisation…

 

M:  …then we don’t tend to carry the trauma with us afterwards

 

C:  …because its been processed and resolved?

 

M:  Yes. So the trauma that’s got trapped in the body – the Warrior has gone completely offline because it wasn’t safe. You may be physically able to fight or flee as a child but you just can’t because you are so totally dependent on the people around you. The fear is that it could then just cause something even worse to happen. Or sometimes it’s a trauma where we can’t move because we are literally pinned down or trapped in some way. So the Warrior is completely off line and we have to totally rely on our magician – and we go into that freeze place – and yes part of that is dissociation and seeing it from a distance, that’s one thing that can happen. Confusion is another.

 

C:  And a sort of preoccupation?

 

M:  Yes and working it out, what we call the ‘risk manager’ – the part that’s constantly looking out for risks to make sure that it doesn’t happen again.

 

C:  And that leads to sitting on the fence about things?

 

M:  Yes. Because making this kind of decision evokes this kind of childhood belief that you could do something that could cause something [bad to happen].

 

C:  And therefore thinking you could actually do something to stop something as well – trying to take responsibility for the situation.

 

M:  Yes and then being in that paralysed space of ‘no I can’t speak, I can’t move I can’t do anything because it might make this worse’.

 

C:  Yes, that makes a lot of sense. In the context of trauma then what would Lover be – would that be the grieving element?

 

M:  Lover is the feelings, all the feelings that can’t be expressed – the vulnerability of the trauma – which is what the Magician is trying to protect you from because it’s such extreme vulnerability in that situation that literally all the feelings that go with that – sadness and grief, yes, but there’s going to be rage and anger as well.

 

C:  So rage and anger can live in that territory too?

 

M:  All emotions live in the Lover. With the other archetypes we always talk about the ‘gateway emotion’ but the emotion doesn’t kind of ‘live’ there if you see what I mean. It’s the gateway emotion that we need in order to feel able to experience that archetype.

 

C:  I remember you saying that grief was the gateway emotion for the lover.

 

M:  Lover represents all the emotions that we feel. Its where our ability to express our emotions lies.

 

C:  And shame tries to block those emotions, to try to stop the processing because its not safe enough – or at least that is the perception…

 

M:  …and theres no one to listen – so that’s where the Sovereign comes in. There’s no one who is going to receive those emotions and still love and care for you unconditionally and give you the correct response.

 

C:  So if you’ve grown up in a situation where there wasn’t enough of that Sovereign energy around how do you heal that and develop that later on in life so that you’re not constantly going back into these traumatic situations?

 

M:  Well it’s interesting because a lot of the time we’ve been talking about Sovereign I’ve been thinking – ‘well this is what a therapist does – this is the role that a therapist plays’ – and it’s not the only role that a therapist plays because you also hold a Magicians role – stepping back and allowing people to see perspective and reframe things. But a lot of the time I think a good therapist is modelling that unconditional love, that acceptance, that lack of judgment….so that someone can be free and the inner child parts are free to come up. Certainly in Shadow Work that’s what we would do. Almost always the first thing we do with anybody is to bring in a strong Sovereign so that they can learn to be that way towards themselves. That’s the sort of double whammy: if you haven’t had that from the outside then you don’t treat yourself like that – you talk to yourself from a more critical place in a way that maybe your parents or those around you treated you. And so you can’t even bring love for yourself to those parts until you’ve had it modelled somehow or experienced it in a piece of Shadow Work.

 

C:  Yes I mean I’ve done Shadow Work Groups with you where as an individual I’ve done pieces of work and then I’ve also done couples work. I’m wondering though, how it works in a group dynamic where there’s transference between people in a group that’s quite complex because it involves more than one person, or more than two people. Is there any insight from the Sovereign perspective on those sort of situations?

So far we’ve talked about an individual’s inner world so I am asking how does that mesh – for example, if there is trauma present and somebody is not mobilised, how does that interact with someone say who has a very strong Warrior?

 

M:  Do you mean not in Shadow Work but in a group dynamic situation of some kind?

 

C:  How would you work with the Shadow Work principles with that kind of thing or would you avoid them because they are too complex and its actually better to work with individuals and couples separately?

 

M:  There’s no reason to avoid it except that it would be complicated but that in a way that only ups the potential for healing. But I think the Shadow Work communication model (which I think you have come across) – that would be my first port of call so that everyone can start to see, especially the people involved, and I would work with two at a time within the complex dynamic I think to try and simplify it a bit and when you’ve got an understanding of that then you can look at the bigger picture so that everybody involved, including the two people, can start to understand why each person is behaving in a certain way. Because the person who is being Warrior is likely also to be carrying some pain or some trauma from the past that’s causing them to behave that way that’s expressing differently, that for them is expressing as Warrior – the person who is traumatised will be behaving maybe in fragmented ways or confusing ways to other people because of their reaction to the situation that they are perceiving as something from their traumatised past. And so the communication model is one way – or just talking about parts of people and helping them to see what parts are ‘out’: What is it that’s stimulating the traumatised person? Where is that coming from? Why are they feeling that way and having that usually quite extreme response? And equally what is it from the Warrior person’s past that is causing them to react to it? It maybe that they carry something very similar themselves that they don’t want to see and so the Warrior is protecting them from seeing that by attacking. Or it could be a multitude of other reasons. But the first thing – the Sovereign’s job – is to bring off the shame, that has to be done. So the Sovereign’s job is to hold the belief that everybody in that room is absolutely sane and perfect and loving and loveable and is behaving as they are for totally understandable reasons. It’s in that sort of cauldron that then everybody can step back – you know that doesn’t mean that the pain and the anger and the resentment and hurt and everything won’t be there …

 

C:  …but if the shame’s not there then people can own their part in it or their history of what has led to that behaviour can’t they, and not have to keep defending or dissociating or hiding.

 

M:  But you know equally it’s important not to force someone to do that if they aren’t ready for it. They may just stay entrenched in their position because that’s less risky than revealing to themselves, as well as to other people, what’s gone on for them in the past and what they’re trying to struggle with in their unconscious. So it’s very important that everything is always done with people’s permission. In a group there may be a risk that there is pressure on someone to admit or acknowledge something that it’s just not the right time to admit or acknowledge. So that would have to be done very sensitively.

 

C:  So Sovereign then is also compassion?

 

M:  Yes

 

C:  What’s the gateway emotion for Sovereign?

 

M:  Interestingly it’s Joy.

 

C:  That is interesting! Yes because joy resonates with higher emotions doesn’t it? I mean I know that might sound judgemental of more negative emotions which serve their own purpose, but in terms of having vision – that comes from joy doesn’t it? It comes from an opening to life, an opening to possibility and to things being different in the future. Rather than keeping on cycling through trauma, Joy is the opening out into some other expansion, some other life – positive experience that would make it worth doing the work, you know, worth putting in the effort for, or thinking through, or planning it or feeling the fear of it or whatever (gesturing to the relevant archetypes represented in the room).

 

M:  Exactly! Yes so there’s the joy that’s the real excitement, really kind of heightened – ‘Yes! Im going to build myself a Shadow Work room!’ – you know that kind of joy, and there’s the kind of joy that comes – say I’m working with a couple where I know that they are both good and lovely and wonderful and worthy people and I know that I’m a good and wonderful and lovely person and so its that more quiet, almost you might say peaceful joy of knowing and coming from that place which I believe is really important when you are working with a group or an individual.

 

C:  I’ve also experienced when I’ve been in real pain and very deflated this very subtle feeling of self compassion which feels like the sort of ‘thin end of the wedge’ of joy.

 

M:  Yes.

 

C:  You know it’s like rather than insisting that I go from 0 to 60 and feel absolutely ecstatic and want to dance – just that tiny little thread at the bottom of self compassion is the beginning of climbing back up into feeling in tune with vision and genuinely optimistic and energised.

I feel like we don’t have enough words for joy – I’m on a a bit of a mission to try and find more words for it because I think it is only understood as a kind of ‘out there full volume’ thing and actually I think that dishonours what it is – and it makes it unreachable.

 

M:  I think it does – yes and it forces people to be in a place, like you were saying, it sort of latches onto that idea as something higher and better than any other form of emotion – whereas I think the really important one for Sovereign is just that knowing that you’re OK, that you’re loved and that you are good and that just brings a real peace and gentle joy and then everything else can come from that. And Sovereign has this two sided nature as well – so the one side is the vision and the passion which is the masculine – and then the feminine is the blessing and the care and the support – and both are needed, both are equally as important – and there’s joy related to both of those which I think is the two different kinds of joy that we are talking about. So if you just have the blessing and the care and the support then you have that warmth and safety but not much growth and then if you just have the passion and the vision then you burn out – you just get excited and excitable and it doesn’t have any strength behind it because then you collapse. Manic depression / bipolar is a kind of inflation and deflation of Sovereign. So having loads of great ideas and then collapsing into that really depressed place of ‘Well who am I to do that?’ you know ‘Who am I to even be breathing?’ kind of thing because there is not that love and sense of self worth there…

 

C:  …and sort of continual blessing in the background.

 

M:  Yes exactly there’s not that bedrock.

 

C:  Do you see any particular patterns in your work around the Sovereign? For example people needing to have connections to other archetypes in place before they can access Sovereign or you said that normally you try to bring Sovereign in quite early on because actually Sovereign is the one that opens things out.

 

M:  The main thing that I notice when I am working with Sovereign is that it sounds so easy and wonderful and lovely to bring in a part that’s going to love and bless and support you, but people tend to find it quite hard. So quite often if I encourage people and they really want to bring in this Sovereign part that’s going to really support them, then when they first try it, it quite often looks like the parenting that they received as children. So their version of caring, their version of loving may be really quite critical and judgemental and harsh. Or it may be a bit more subtle than that or it may be kind of ‘well you didn’t do badly but if only you’d done…this and that and the other … then that would have been great’. So people need a lot of coaching and they need to step back and see that from the outside and see what they are doing to themselves. That their idea of nurture and blessing is not really what they would want, it’s a little bit off because its what they learned from a parental figure who themselves was getting it a little bit wrong or even very wrong. And so then we have to try again.

 

C:  And do you – because you’re the one in charge in these sessions – are you modelling Sovereign in a way?

 

M:  In a similar way as a therapist I think I use a lot of Magician, to help the person get perspective and see and reframe things but I think probably the most important thing is that I’m modelling Sovereign. So I am bringing that to hold the whole session. And I’m accepting all the different parts that come out on the carpet. Trusting that they are there for a reason. Trusting that they are there for the good of that person and trying to find out what it is they want and why they are there and giving them my unconditional attention and care and positive regard.

 

C:  Can you remember what your first experience of Sovereign was?

 

M:  Apart from my very first piece of Shadow Work which was a Lover piece, a grief piece, for the next few years my memory is of there being a black coloured part of me on the carpet that was completely covered with black cloth like a mushroom and the group bringing some kind of Sovereign to support that part – I couldn’t do it myself. I couldn’t – I just thought she was just …unspeakable…which is something that happens with trauma apparently – the verbal part of our brain gets completely shut down…

 

C:  …so having other grown up Sovereign brains online…

 

M:  So yes my memory is of ending up being held by people and having some sense of being loved and cared for but I remember very much not being able to bring it to myself for a long time…

 

C:  Was it something that you had to kind of grow from the ground up? Or is it something you think is innate in everyone and it’s just a question of accessing the Sovereign archetype?

 

M:  I think it’s a question of finding out what’s in the way – you know I thought I had a lot of Sovereign from being a teacher, from being a single parent, from being a Shadow Work facilitator and couple’s counsellor – clearly I could turn the Sovereign out to other people but it was a case of what was in the way of it coming in towards myself really – and I think a lot of that was the shame that you’ve talked about. That sense of there being something to be gained from ignoring that part and turning against that part of myself and denying that she was part of me and working with that.

 

C:  I’m interested to know as a follow on to that – what have you noticed people working on in their inner world in this way impacting on their outer world?

 

M:  I think – I mean I know this is a Sovereign interview so I don’t want to be artificially skewed towards the Sovereign, but I do think that the most common feedback is just people being able to be kind to themselves – and give themselves a break and feel less shame in their interactions with other people, and having compassion for the parts of themselves that they are really ashamed of that they really don’t like that they really don’t want people to see. Just being able to be gentle – to turn that corner of not judging themselves, of having some compassion and acceptance for those parts.

 

Then they have that kind of relaxedness and joy that I was talking about and they can say ‘Well I am a bit of an angry person’ or you know ‘I do lead quite a limited life, I do get quite frightened’ or whatever it is they’re ashamed of they are able to speak it and speaking as I already said with trauma is such an important thing. So to lessen the shame so that people can speak about themselves and to be able to hold themselves and talk to others as though they respect and care about themselves is a really big step and a lot seems to follow from that.

 

C:  I’m just wondering about the cultural or social approval or disapproval of people being in their Sovereign. How much is it related to status? You know, if you are given the status where Sovereign seems to correspond for example being a teacher, or being a therapist or  something – people expect you to be in your Sovereign don’t they? And that seems to be a cultural norm. But if say you are a student or you have a lower status within a group for whatever reason, how do you use Sovereign without almost inviting external aggression or indignation or something like that?

 

M:  I mean it’s a good question because Sovereign is generally very wounded in our society and that starts – I mean it may start in peoples homes depending on the parenting they get, but it definitely starts at school where we are expected to be subservient and give in to authority: We have no right to speak unless we are spoken to – or we have to put our hand up. Our joy, interestingly, our joy of learning, our joy of self expression is crushed. We are taught to control ourselves and to bring the Magician online out of fear – doing something we have to do that we have no choice in. So all of these are smothering the Sovereign and it’s based on conditional acceptance, if you write well: ’good girl’, if you can sit still: ‘good girl’, there’s no unconditional love involved – there’s no place for that. You pretty much can’t have unconditional love in a class of 30 children, it just wouldn’t work!

 

C:  Something about institutionalisation and Sovereign really not meshing very well then.

 

M:  Yes and getting warped into this kind of thing that you’ve talked about where one person is the Sovereign and in control and must be looked up to, which isn’t what Sovereign is about at all. It’s much better to think about the family and the kind of leadership and support that a loving mother would give to her children. Instead it’s got warped into this massive authority figure, which is really bad for the authority figure because they feel they have to take all the responsibility and do everything themselves and get no support because support is out: in school you are not allowed support because you can’t ask a question in an exam, you have to learn to do it on your own. So we get that message reinforced really – you know we look down in our society on people who need support. So the bigger an authority figure you are the more trapped you are into that kind of situation, where you to have to look like you know it all and you can do it all…

 

C:  …and be invincible in some way

 

M:  And you get this difficult dynamic going on. Then what does that authority figure, who is backed into a corner, do with someone who starts piping up and having ideas of their own and, you know, thinking that they know stuff – it’s terribly threatening to their very fragile position.

 

C:  And presumably then all the rage of the people who haven’t piped up against the authority before starts to be directed at the person who has piped up because ‘how dare they?’ when nobody else seems to have the right – how dare they give themselves the right?

 

M:  They’re not playing by the rules. These rules are very strong in our society. There are very few examples of healthy Sovereign because healthy Sovereign has two sides to it: So there’s leadership as a side of Sovereign. Following is another side of Sovereign – to be healthy in your Sovereign – you have to do both. To be a good leader you have to follow, you have to have as much of your life as you have leading, following. Following others, getting support, getting care, learning, whatever ‘following’ means to you.

 

M:  You know the Sovereign needs their ‘court’ to use the old fashioned term. But you know she needs to be supported as much as she is leading and when that doesn’t happen you get this brittleness because the leader needs somewhere to go to say ‘Oh I don’t know how to cope with this person because she is having ideas that are sometimes better than mine / different to mine. What should I do?’ You know the odds are that the leaders don’t have somewhere to go with that – so then they either have to resort to their Magician and some kind of cruelty, manipulation or control or to their Warrior and some kind of outright kind of attack. In some cases they might resort to their Lover and form a kind of fake connection where they lose their authority and say ‘Oh I want you to be my friend’ They sort of come down to the same level which isn’t their role either because their role is to be the one that’s in charge. So it’s terribly confused for us. How do I stay in charge but still give another person respect and still listen to them and still allow them to speak? What is it? What is subtly different about my role as a leader here if I give away my power and let other people have ideas and speak and even contradict me, then how am I still the leader? And people don’t know the answer to that question.

 

C:  I suppose its’s about including. It’s a quality of leadership is to be able to include isn’t it? Quite enlightened leadership maybe, but to include different perspectives and be able to integrate them and sort of model that way of integrating to the people that they are leading.

 

M:  I think it’s helpful to think of a family and to think of a mother with several children and she will listen – say they’re wanting to go on holiday – listen to all the children’s ideas and what they all want to do and she may very well do some of them or take some of them on board but she takes the final decision because she knows she’s the leader, she gives as much attention as she can to what they are saying and what they want and it may very well turn out that they can have what they want. That doesn’t in any way diminish her authority.

 

C:  I’m wondering how Sovereign applies to the politicians we have at the moment – people’s perspective of them and the scapegoating of them and the abuses of power that they get tempted into – we’re seeing a shadowy Sovereign being played out here (in the UK) and in America at the moment.

 

M:  We are, and I think again its interesting to think of leadership and Sovereign as involving both the leader and the followers – they’re all involved in that dynamic so we put them up there – we vote them into power – (unless there really is some vote rigging going on which we’ll leave out of the equation for now!). You know we choose these people and in a way we then want and expect impossible things from them. Now where the dynamic starts I don’t know. It may start with them promising impossible things, but somehow the dynamic gets skewed so we actually, as the ‘little people’, are looking up to our leaders in a way that’s backing them into this corner of being perfect. You know, if you look at Jeremy Corbyn being criticised for not wearing a tie or not being super decisive or not having some of these leadership ‘qualities’ that we believe are what a proper leader should have. It shows what pressure other leaders are under to be in this – the best word I can think of is a sort of a brittle, backed into a corner way of having decisive answers for everything, for never getting anything wrong.

 

C:  Always towing the line and wearing that tie. Which to me doesn’t look like leadership. It looks like obedience and conformity which you could equate to almost a lack of responsibility and self directed thinking. It’s quite flummoxing to know that other people have this totally different world view where they think those qualities are qualities of leadership whereas from another perspective they don’t look like that at all. I wonder whether when we put all the responsibility on ‘official’ leaders whether then we disown Sovereign in ourselves.

 

M:  Absolutely, Yes. And then we get ‘king slaying’ as we refer to it in Shadow Work: We put someone up on a pedestal and then we just really enjoy pulling them down because we don’t have that power and authority ourselves because we’ve given it away. So we don’t want to see someone who has it. So we will criticise and pull them down rather than get behind them, you know, because how leadership works in a healthy system (in theory, if there is such a thing!) is that all the followers are behind their leader they are blessing and supporting their leader and not wanting them to fail – quite the opposite – wanting them to succeed. So they are there behind them and the leader is receiving this rich resource of support from every single person who is in that community or, who is a hundred percent behind them and then it looks and feels very different.

 

C:  And then if the Sovereign knows those people are behind them, when they bring their own ideas or they bring autonomy or their own impulse, it’s seen as a contribution to moving forward rather than as undermining.

 

M:  And an essential contribution as well because one person can’t possibly have all the answers. They are just in a role for whatever reason and it’s quite healthy if that role is quite fluid as well I think, over time, so it’s not one person for too long. So coming back to your original question you know there’s very little that an individual person can do if they are in an organisation or a set up which is organised in this dysfunctional Sovereign way. There’s very little power that they have to be able to change that dynamic so that if they speak up then they are almost certainly going to be got at in some way if they are operating inside an organisation like this. It’s kind of built in to the unwritten rules and it’s a very difficult dynamic to change. I can’t emphasise strongly enough how much that comes from the school system, especially the private school system, the boarding school system – where independence is everything. Independence is ‘God’ because you’ve been severed from your parents and severed from your Sovereign quite often at the age of 8 and so there’s no way you are going to be able to form healthy leadership from that place. You are going to be relying totally on your Magician.

 

C:  And then often the people who form the leadership of our countries come from those establishments.

 

M:  And if they don’t, it is soaked in the ethos. I mean state schools are soaked in the ethos of boarding schools – they are influenced by that.

 

C:  And then church schools have their own formalities.

 

M:  And Sovereignty is where our higher power lives as well so any religious organisation is affecting the idea of Sovereign by bringing in a higher power that maybe has even more influence than parents – someone we believe who ideally unconditionally loves and cares for us but there are other messages that come down with that in religion.

 

C:  Yes I’m finding that with my own son who is 6 and who goes to a state school which is also a church school – actually quite a religious one. The only image he is given of God when they worship is of a male god. So all the prayers are said to a male god and I’ve asked for that to be changed (because it has been changed now in a lot of churches) and ‘No absolutely not’. Its a big responsibility because I’m in charge of his view of what Sovereign is and I don’t want that being done in my name. It’s a clear example of what you are saying.

 

M:  It’s a very good example that his idea of authority will now be a man – probably a white man as well..

 

C:   …Undoubtedly sporting a beard..

 

M:  …and that goes in very deep. I think one of the core things for me about Sovereign is that it’s impossible to truly give out what the Sovereign gives out if you haven’t received it yourself and also if you are not able to give it to yourself. There’s something really important to understand there. If we look at some of our wounded leaders who maybe have been to boarding school, or who clearly haven’t received the kind of unconditional parental love that we would hope that they received, and if they’ve never done any work to heal that then it’s literally impossible for them to love themselves enough to be able to stand up and lead in a healthy Sovereign way. So it’s not for want of being willing or trying or it’s not even from negative intention, it’s from literally, psychologically, that being impossible. Same with parenting, same with being a therapist – we can’t sit opposite someone and give them unconditional love until we’ve learned, to a reasonable extent, to do that for ourselves. I mean none of us obviously has ‘got there’ to total unconditional love – but to know that place, to know what that feels like.

 

C:  I guess one’s relationship to a sense of ‘source’ or overall goodness in life is important for that because once we’re grown up it’s unrealistic to expect to be nurtured from a Sovereign place by other adults in a consistent way I think?

 

M:  I don’t think so – no, not at all. In fact I think that’s what we should be looking for. But we are not likely to find it unless we are doing it to ourselves first.

 

C:  Why is that? Is it the idea that until you resonate with something yourself then even if it’s right in front of your face you don’t let it in…?

 

M:  …It’s going to feel wrong, it’s just going to feel wrong somehow or the other stuff is going to feel right.

 

C:  I remember having this experience at the end of a really intense workshop where we formed a kind of human arch and one person at a time walked through the arch and they had their eyes shut and we could whisper acknowledgements or blessings into their ears as they passed through and there was one man who had been through all kinds of abuses as a child and he shook with kind of terror and vulnerability all the way down this line of people, shaking, sweating, because he was really having to reach and open a place in him that had been so wounded and he was offering it back up to the light again. It was one of the most moving things I’ve ever seen.

 

M:  I mean that’s a great demonstration of how hard it is. In the real world he would avoid that – because who wants to be shaking a sweating and going through all that in the middle of a meeting or you know, when you’re on a date or whatever. It is a question of we can’t recognise something until we’ve seen it inside. It might even feel threatening or not real or not trust- worthy. So we generally have to go through quite a big shift internally before we can start receiving that from outside but then yeah my God! Have as much of it as you can, you know! It doesn’t cost anything! And a lot of people have a higher power that resources them as well in a different way. But you have to be careful with that because we have a piece called a ‘God split’ (in Shadow Work) where we get the higher power of that person out. So we may have someone very spiritual who believes in ‘love and peace’. So we get ‘love and peace’ out on the carpet and lo and behold it is saying: ‘Well, you’re not very loving and peaceful are you?, You’re not actually a very calm person…’ and we find out that even their higher power is actually giving them messages that are subtly critical or judgemental and they are not really getting that full acceptance. So in a similar way we try again and we try to get them in touch with a real higher power.

 

C:  That’s very interesting because in terms of trauma work I can see that Sovereign is resource, is being here in the body, being connected, feeling blessed, feeling permission, feeling safe. There’s something I’ve been learning about called ‘titration’ – being able to re-experience some feelings of trauma but in the light of resource. Being able to go in and out of those painful feelings and keep on touching back into resource so that re-traumatisation doesn’t happen.

 

M:  I do that a lot with one to one clients – so we have a lover part – a traumatised part, sometimes from a very specific age or event on the carpet and then we have the Sovereign part of them and so first the Sovereign will go and make a connection with the smaller part, the vulnerable part and let it know that it’s a safe space and that part is welcome and so on and then they’ll switch into that part and be able to experience some of the trauma and at that point I take the place of the Sovereign or ‘I remind them what the Sovereign was saying and so on and then they come out again to be in the Sovereign and so we work between the two.

 

C:  Yes that reminds me of the poem you read out at the beginning of the groups I was in – Everyone is welcome here. I realise now that’s actually Sovereign isn’t it? You were bringing that in right from the word go.

 

M:  Sometimes we even do it with a candle and each person in the group goes to each person with a candle and says ‘Welcome – all parts of you are welcome here’- it’s really nice. And very Sovereign! In fact fire is the element associated with Sovereign in Shadow Work. I lit a candle for us today and there is something that really speaks to me about Sovereign. You were talking about the importance of Sovereign and almost the centrality of Sovereign and almost you could say that it’s our pilot light – the spark of life inside us…

 

C:  …I’m thinking of the expression of ‘keeping the candle burning’ for someone or something, you know keeping the faith with something, an alignment to a higher vision of something, intention, purpose, all of that is symbolised by a candle. Even the life force within us is often described as a candle that’s either ‘snuffed out’ or ‘re-kindled’.

 

M:  It’s that love or that warmth – obviously it can be really raging or really burning as well when we are really on fire with an idea or something but I more often think of that warmth, gentleness and life force.

 


For more information about Shadow Work and Marianne’s practice please see: Marianne’s Website

 

Are You Leading From Fear Or From Joy?

This article provides an opportunity for you to reflect on your leadership.

Whatever kind of leadership role you hold, from organisational roles to parental roles to the challenges of leading yourself through life, this article will offer a framework through which to explore your leadership style.

Introduction

Below is a sign that is displayed in my local (and very excellent) fish and chip restaurant:

chip shop (1)

I have a little chuckle at this sign every time I go in to the shop, and I imagine most other people respond in this way too. It’s hard to imagine someone taking exception to the joke, and saying we really should support and respect our leaders. Leaders are not popular in our society. Very few of us have respect for our leaders or believe they are genuinely trying to lead us in the best way possible for all. They attract a huge amount of criticism and mistrust and are the butt of many jokes. Words that might come to mind are, privileged, out of touch, uncaring, self absorbed, ineffectual, bullying, manipulative, money grabbing, untrustworthy, corrupt, sleazy and worse.

Now picture the elders in a tribe. Any fictional tribe that you can bring to mind – don’t worry about whether or not such a place has ever existed. What words would you associate with these leaders? Maybe fair, thoughtful, wise, calm, strong, trustworthy. Similarly, now bring to mind an ideal loving parent – we may think of caring, supportive, forgiving, boundaried, fair, protective, attentive, listening, encouraging.

These imagined elders and parents have all the qualities that most leaders would say they aspire to – yet the higher up we go in organisations or political structures the less we tend to see these qualities. And even in some small organisations leadership doesn’t look anything like this – with bullying and manipulation being more the flavour of the day, or alternatively a ‘hands off’ approach where there is no presence or genuine leadership. Similarly with parenting, which could be thought of as the most important leadership role we can ever carry out, we often see manipulation and control, over the top anger and bullying or alternatively, a lack of boundaries and an ‘anything for a peaceful life’ approach.

Why is this? It’s as if being placed in a position of leadership people morph in to something different. Their integrity goes, along with the original passion and commitment with which they took on the role. People get channelled in to behaving in particular ways, and as the pressure piles up their good intentions get lost, instead they’re swept up in a struggle to prove their worth, gain esteem and stay in control. They end up leading from a place of fear.

This is so widespread that it is about more than the individual leader. It seems to be a societal wound that we carry together. Indeed, I believe this wound does not just belong to leaders, it also belongs to the people they lead. It is a situation colluded in at some unconscious level by all involved. What is causing this ‘sick’ leadership?

The Sovereign Archetype

In this article I am going to try to answer this question with reference to the ideas and beliefs behind Shadow Work, and I’ll describe the shadows that can come in to play as we carry out our leadership roles. Finally I’ll take a look at possible changes that we can make on a personal level in order to begin to heal this ‘sickness’.
For the purpose of this article I’m loosely defining a leader as the person ‘in charge’ of others, the one who guides others, makes decisions and takes overall responsibility. For the sake of simplicity I am going to talk about the ‘Leader’ (The person ‘in charge’) and the ‘People’ (those being led by the leader in whatever given situation). I’ll use this to encompass the whole variety of possible leadership roles that we could be discussing here – parent, teacher, leader of a group, leader of an organisation, leader of a company, politician and so on. I believe this article is also relevant for each of us on an internal level as we consider how we lead ourselves through life – is there harmony between the part of us that leads and the parts that follow? How does this dynamic work? Do we bully oursleves, bribe, criticise, or give up on ourselves? or do we encourage and support ourselves and say ‘Well done!’? It is worth exploring these internal dynamics and discovering how effectively we lead ourselves. This is likely to give insight in to our Leadership in the outer world.

I am going to organise this discussion of shadows according to the four archetypes that we work with in Shadow Work –

The Magician,
The Lover,
The Warrior and
The Sovereign.

We believe that we need access to the healthy qualities of all of these four archetypes if we are to live our life fully and have a sense of wholeness. However in this article I will focus most attention on the Sovereign archetype as this is the one that we associate most closely with Leadership.

A summary of each archetype is given before the relevant sections. You don’t need to know anything more about the archetypes in order to go ahead and read the article, but it may be helpful for you to have an explanation around what is meant by the ‘Gateway Emotion’ that is listed at the end of each summary. The Gateway Emotion is the emotion that we need to be willing to feel if we want to have access to the healthy qualities that this particular archetype has to offer. It’s as if feeling this emotion opens up a gateway to these qualities. If we’re not able to feel the gateway emotion we won’t be able to fully live this side of ourselves. I’d also like to introduce here the concept of the ‘deep wound’ in each archetype. These are also listed at the end of each summary. We believe that that there are certain deep wounds that we can carry as individuals, often due to the circumstances of the family and society in which we are brought up. Archetypes can be caused to go out of balance as a result of these deep wounds. Each wound will cause a different archetype to become unbalanced. If you’re interested in exploring all of this further there are links at the end of this article that will take you to a more detailed 12/15 minute talk about each one.

So let’s start with Sovereign:

Healthy Sovereign – Our Sovereign is our inner Queen or King. The loving parent inside who guides and blesses us as we travel through life. This is the heart that cares.
Our Sovereign holds the vision and passion for our life, it is the part of us
that knows what we really want, and will encourage and
support us as we work to make our plans a reality.
Deep Wound – ‘I’m not good enough’
Gateway Emotion – Joy

In Shadow Work we believe leadership lies in the Sovereign archetype. If this archetype is wounded and out of balance we will lose our capacity to lead well. Interestingly, we will also lose touch with our capacity to ‘be lead’ well – to be effective members of a group, organisation or workplace, supporting and respecting our leader.
The wound that harms the Sovereign archetype is the belief that we are not good enough. This belief develops if we haven’t received the support and blessing we need in our life to believe that we are good enough – worthy, loveable and deserving of respect and care, – exactly as we are, without having to do anything. If we don’t have this belief then we have nothing to rest back in to. We need to be able to rest back, knowing we are held, loved, cherished and believed in – just as we are. From this place we can feel true confidence and find the strength we need to carry out our role. I liken this to the ‘Seat’ or ‘Throne’ of a Leader. A place in which we can sit and act from with confidence because we know we are blessed.
When we can sit back and relax in to ourselves, knowing that we are good enough, then what we do comes from a place of choosing – a place of wanting to – because it brings us joy. If we can’t sit back and rest in ourselves, then what we do will come from a need to prove our worth, or to get others to like and approve of us. Essentially this means we’re acting from a place of fear – fear that we are not good enough.

The Chinese proverb below captures this well:

‘Tension is who we think we should be, relaxation is who we are.’

If we can’t relax into who we are, because we believe that who we are is not enough, then we will always be tense, and we’ll be leading from this tense, fearful place. Our leadership will have shadowy qualities, and so will the way we allow ourselves to be led.

If you look at the Sovereign summary above you’ll see that Joy is the gateway emotion to the Sovereign archetype. This means we will not be able to access our true leadership (Sovereign) skills unless we have access to our joy. This doesn’t mean we need to be joyful all the time. Of course not. Carrying out our leadership role will include times of deep sadness, powerful anger and paralysing fear – and we will need to get the support necessary to move through these. What it does mean is that our disposition towards our leadership, our default position if you like, is one of joy. We feel joyful about what we do. We believe in what we are doing and we feel good about it, in the same way that we believe in ourselves and feel good about ourselves. Both of these things bring joy. If we are in touch with our joy and sense of goodness then we will naturally lead well, and we will want to bless and support those around us. We will give our gifts and our time freely and joyfully. If we’re enjoying what we do it will nourish and feed us and we will be less likely to get tired and burnt out. Our duties will feel less like ‘work’ and more like ‘life’.

Inflated and deflated Sovereign

So we can see that, if we’re carrying this Sovereign wound of ‘Not good enough’ then this will impact our ability to access our healthy Sovereign side. Instead we end up either inflating our Sovereign side – to try to PROVE how ‘good enough’ we are, or, alternatively, we deflate in our Sovereign qualities – giving up, and accepting a place if inferiority and the frustrations and hopelessness that go with this.
Typically those of us who inflate will be drawn to Leadership roles and those who deflate will become permanent (but often reluctant) followers.

The following are characteristics of the Inflated Sovereign: Going it alone. Risk taking. Shining for approval. Super hero. On fire, Blazing. Needs to be the biggest and the best or else they’re nothing. Performing for love. Giving everything to the cause. Not accepting support. Martyr – caring too much for those you lead and sacrificing yourself for them. Not resting or caring for yourself. Never taking a day off.

These people are working hard to disprove the belief they carry. They’re trying to prove to the world that they are good enough.

The following are characteristics of the Deflated Sovereign: Hopelessness. Lack of confidence. Resentment. Cynicism. No fire in the heart – ‘I can’t’, ‘It’s too hard’, ‘I’m tired’. A sense of betrayal. Wanting to criticise and bring down those in power (whilst not willing to step up and take power themselves)

These people are giving in to the belief that they carry and saying to the world, ‘You’re right, I’m really not good enough. I’m worth very little.’

This may look like two totally different sets of people, yet there is much less difference between the two categories than may first appear – they are bound together by the identical wound that they carry – a belief that they are simply not good enough. Indeed individuals may flip between these two places, between inflation and deflation. For example a person may be in a leadership role at work where they exhibit some of the inflated traits, but at home their partner leads, and they follow and exhibit some of the deflated traits.

What is missing here is support. As I said previously, we believe that poor leadership comes from wounding in the Sovereign archetype which is caused by not believing we are ‘good enough’. This belief comes from a lack of support, a lack of blessing which in turn leads to a lack of self esteem and self belief, and a deep lack of confidence.

This is a wound that many of us carry as individuals, and it is also a wound that is compounded and encouraged by the society that we live in. We are simply not given the message that we are good enough, just as we are. It starts when we are first born. I remember watching in shock as a friend’s mother told her young baby, who was crying for milk, ‘You’ll just have to wait till it’s feeding time. When you’re bringing in the money, then you’ll be able to dictate the routines of this household.’ This poor child (although clearly too young to understand this communication) will certainly not be growing up to believe he is worthy just for being him – that he will be loved and cared for no matter what. Only when he is bringing in the money will he have value, and only then will his needs be taken seriously. Many babies and children pick up a similar message, with parents not having the time to hold them or give them as much attention as they would like, but instead the child is praised for being ‘good’ or ‘quiet’ or for ‘helping’ or achieving in some way or for looking neat, or pretty. At school we are also required to perform if we wish to be approved of, and this is quite relentless throughout our childhood, with a constant requirement to improve on previous grades. There’s very little opportunity to reach a point where we are told we can rest – we are good enough. Advertising too tells us that if we want approval we need to work hard constantly – to have perfect bodies, skin, cars, houses, muscles, breasts and so on. We are not getting the message here that how we are is good enough – quite the opposite in fact. We’re being told we need to work hard and achieve or perform in order to be accepted and to be ok. To find a partner who will love us we need to starve ourselves or exercise relentlessly, or work hard to earn enough money to buy flashy cars or other paraphernalia. We need to go through prolonged beauty routines or have surgery, hair removal – the list is endless and the message is clear – for goodness sake don’t just be yourself – that’s just NOT ok. You’re not good enough just as you are. When people bring this wound in to their leadership they will find it hard to lead from an authentic place – to admit to their human limitations, to ask for guidance when they’re unsure, to ask for time off when they’re ill, to ask for support when they’re overwhelmed.

Equally, the People will not WANT their Leader to behave like this – to show any vulnerability. The People are, by and large, carrying the same Sovereign wound. They want their leader to be the one who, by some superhuman effort, achieves what they cannot – is able to reach perfection. They won’t want a leader who is like them – who has vulnerabilities, insecurities, indecisiveness, bad days etc. If they can’t stand these aspects of themselves and see them as failings, then they will not be able to tolerate a leader who is like this. They will be looking for the ‘missing’ parts of themselves in their leader, and they will demand perfection, strength, authority etc. But this is not possible. Everyone makes mistakes, even the strongest person has moments of weakness and the most authoritative person has moments of indecision.

So the dynamic is set, with both the Leader and the People buying in to a situation where the Leader is required to be superhuman. This, (being clearly impossible as he/she is human!) requires the Leader to hide certain aspects of themselves, their weakness, vulnerability, sickness etc, and so they are forced to to put these aspects in to shadow. It also requires the ‘followers’ to hide their gifts and strengths, so that they can be led, (and because they mustn’t step in and help out their leader, that wouldn’t be playing the game!) Hiding their gifts and strengths also ensures that they themselves will never run the risk of being put up in that place of impossible demands. The People expect impossible things of leaders and then sit back and watch as the cracks begin to show. They are quick to judge a leader who is failing and they struggle to see their leaders as human beings. The Leaders will often happily buy into these projections rather than questioning them, they will work hard to live up to perfection and super human requirements as this is their way of trying to show the world they are good enough.

What happens if we’re not leading from Sovereign?

If we can’t rest in our true sovereignty and authority then we will resort to using contorted versions of the other archetypes in order to push through our leadership role. I’ll describe what this might look like by going through each of the other archetypes in turn, starting with the Lover:

Healthy Lover – Our Lover is the part of us that feels, it connects us with what is going on
inside. This part connects us deeply to others and allows us to be intimate.
This is the spontaneous, creative, dreaming side of us that enjoys
nature, play and sensuality. Our child-like qualities
lie here, along with our vulnerability.
Deep wound ‘I don’t love right’
Gateway Emotion – Grief

If we do not have strong healthy Sovereign energy we may inflate our Lover side and try to lead from this place. This is especially likely if we carry the lover wound – a belief that we are not lovable, or that we do not love right. We may try to be intimate with those we lead and get our connection needs met from them. Examples of this might be a boss having affair with an employee, a teacher having a relationship with a student or a Parent sexually abusing a child. We may try to be ‘friends with everyone’ or to be liked by everyone. We may not be able to set boundaries or to be the adult. We may suffer from a lack of critical thinking. We may not be able to access the gravitas that is required for the role.
This isn’t because there is anything ‘wrong’ or ‘inappropriate’ about our Lover side, it is simply that this is not the side of ourselves that healthy leadership naturally comes from. We may certainly use some of our lover skills – of dreaming, creativity and an ability to connect deeply – in parts of our leadership, but this isn’t the appropriate place to be coming from the majority of the time. It works better to get our Lover needs met elsewhere in our life and this in turn will help us to feel more complete and whole and will enable us to lead from a more joyful place.

Healthy Warrior – Our Warrior is the part of us that can bring about change in our lives
and can step out and take action in the world. It is responsible for setting
our boundaries and saying ‘No’ and ‘Stop’. The warrior has integrity
and courage and speaks the truth. Our Warrior protects us,
and those more vulnerable than ourselves.
Deep Wound ‘I don’t exist’
Gateway Emotion – Anger

If we don’t have sufficient Sovereign energy another option is to inflate our Warrior to help us lead. This will result in us leading from a bullying place: Authoritarian. Not listening. Not being flexible. Stonewalling and not listening. A confrontational challenging manner. Forcing ideas through. Shouting and fist beating. We’ve seen this style of leadership many times in films – abusing those you’re meant to be supporting and leading.
We’re more likely to resort to this kind of Leadership if we carry the Warrior wound – not really believing we exist, or we are real. If we carry this wound we will want to be taken notice of – needing to prove that we exist. It will be hard for us if people disagree with us or question our leadership or our decisions. We will be over forceful to try to avoid our fear of being invisible.
Again, there is nothing wrong with our warrior side, indeed, we will undoubtedly need to call on our healthy Warrior sides at times during our Leadership. However it is not the correct place for our leadership to be coming from. It is something we want to be able to call in when necessary. We sometimes liken this to an imaginary Queendom with the Queen and her military. The Queen needs to call on the military from time to time, and they provide an essential role, but the Queen is the leader and firmly in control. She is the one with the authority. The Military carry out her will – but they are not running the show.

Healthy Magician – Our magician is the part of us that can step back and see things from
many different points of view. Our magician can help us to re-frame situations and
see things differently. This side of us is responsible for assessing risks and
keeping us safe. Our intellect lies here, along with our ability to
transform our understanding of ourselves and the world.
Deep Wound ‘I’m bad or wrong’
Gateway Emotion – Fear

Another alternative if we don’t have sufficient Sovereign energy, is to rely instead on our Magician, inflating this side of ourselves in order to help us lead. In this case our leadership may be: Manipulative. Threatening. Paranoid. Underhand. A reign of fear. No one trusts you. Turning people in the organisation against each other. A lot is unspoken. Deliberately unclear and confusing communication. Smoke and mirrors.
We are particularly likely to rely on this kind of Leadership if we carry the wound of believing we are bad. If we have come to believe there is something fundamentally bad or wrong about us then we will find it very hard to be straightforward and clear. We will always be trying to hide our ‘badness’ in lies, threats, underhand behaviour – anything so as not to be exposed and seen for what we believe we really are. Many politicians are a good example of this type of Leadership, with the practice of ‘Spin’ being a perfect example of using Magician skills to deliberately obscure the truth.
If we’re Leading in this way we are Leading From fear. We are driven by fear rather than feeling our fear. Of course there are things to fear – we may do something that makes us look foolish, others may be better than us and usurp us, we may fail, we may make terrible mistakes and so on… But we need to face this fear and somehow make friends with it rather than avoiding feeling it and being driven by desperately trying to avoid these scenarios. This is what is meant when we say fear is the gateway emotion to our Magician side. We need to be prepared to feel our fear if we are to have healthy Magician qualities. If we are not able to feel our fear then our Magician will come out in the damaging ways described above.

I love the quote by Margaret Mitchell

‘Until you’ve lost your reputation, you never realise what a burden it was.’

Fear of losing a reputation is a big corruptor of genuine leadership. We need to be comfortable with our own fallibility if we are not to fall prey to these fears. We need to know how to ask for help when we’re out of our depth. Everything in life changes and we need to be able to embrace this and face the inevitable changes in our role.

‘Life is a process of becoming, a combination of states we have to go through. Where people fail is that they wish to elect a state and remain in it. This is a kind of death.’ Anais Nin

Balance and Paradox in Leadership

In our close animal ancestors we see the behaviours of ranking – of each animal having a specific place in the herd or group, and of leading – where one animal leads the group during a particular period. We also see the Alpha female and Alpha male phenomenon where a particular animal will be given a ‘top’ position. In Shadow Work we believe that we, as humans, still carry these instincts to rank ourselves with respect to others, to want to be the leader, or to want to shine, to be the big one. We also carry the parallel instinct of wanting to follow, to be small, not to have responsibility. These are the animal instincts that we associate with the Sovereign archetype. We believe it’s important to recognise and understand the animal instincts that we carry as humans rather than denying them. Many of us feel shame about the part of us that wants to shine, that wants to be the biggest and the best. Similarly many of us carry shame around our wish to follow, not to have to think or take charge, but to rest in someone else doing that for us. However the idea of some kind of hierarchy, with people holding different positions, seems to be part of our nature, just as we see it in nature. Rather than rejecting these sides of ourselves it’s better if we get to know them. If we acknowledge and get to know know these instincts in us then we are not unduly influenced by them, but can embrace the positive qualities and let go of aspects that don’t serve us.

So it seems we carry a natural instinct to either follow, or to lead, and it seems things work better for us when we have a chance to experience both of these sides of ourselves. We are then in touch with our full humanity. We need to have times and places where we lead, and times and places where we follow. If we fix in to only one of these positions then we are repressing a part of ourselves, and this leads to shadowy behaviour. Those who are fixed in an ‘always leading’ position develop behaviours such as overconfidence, arrogance, overworking and not listening to or trusting others. This is because they never getting a chance to be a follower, to learn from another and to rest in another. Those fixed in a following position develop behaviours such as shyness, lack of confidence, not speaking up, resentment, bitterness and backstabbing, because they never get the chance to shine and to own their own power.

So if we are in a leadership role it is important that we find times and places where we follow, to keep the balance of humanity in ourselves. Interestingly there are two other Leadership qualities that also have this two sidedness to them, and require us to have a balance of each. The first of these is listening and speaking. Listening and speaking are two sides of leadership. Two sides of the same coin. An effective leader needs to listen as much as they speak. Their speech – their word – only has authority when it carries the wisdom that comes from listening carefully to all the People, and to any external advice that is relevant. The second two sided quality is the giving and receiving of support. Leaders are only true leaders if they are blessed and supported by the People. They are also only true leaders if they are able to bless and support the People in return, rather than using, abusing, bullying, coercing, belittling or ignoring them.

The paradox here is that to be a good leader we need to know how to follow, we need to know how to listen and we need to know how to receive support – these are as much an intrinsic part of leadership as are leading, speaking and guiding and supporting others.

So this gives us three simple ways to do a health check on our leadership –

is there a balance of supporting and being supported?
is there a balance of listening and speaking?
is there a balance of leading and following?

The beginnings of change

There are obviously shifts that need to be made on a societal/social level to bring about the changes needed in our leadership. However on an individual level we can start by getting in touch with the part of us that knows we are good enough just as we are, and there is no need for pretence, hiding, manipulation, bullying, or any of the other potential shadow behaviours we may express in our leadership. This can often involve first getting to know the part of us that believes we’re NOT good enough. The part that may be harshly critical or shaming or simply hopeless feeling. If we get to know and befriend this part – bringing it out of the shadows, then we will have a better chance of believing in our goodness and beginning to lead in an authentic way. Another important step towards believing in our goodness is receiving support and blessing from others – having people around us who reflect back to us our innate goodness, who believe in us no matter what and will stand by us. A good first step in this direction is to find a mentor, supervisor, counsellor or therapist who is seen on a regular basis. If we can get the support we need in order to believe we are good enough then everything in our leadership will begin to change. This, in turn, will affect those we lead and everyone else whose life we touch, as they experience us acting from a place of self worth, authenticity and true confidence. This is a radical act in a society where we have been taught from birth to believe that we are not good enough.

 

Links

Archetype Links:

The Sovereign talk –https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHNer6Qv2dU&index=8&list=PLvgWYx0ae1cAqdaNvwB5k24DwEm-Rfs58

Magician talk –https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDbtyE8bt7c&list=PLvgWYx0ae1cAqdaNvwB5k24DwEm-Rfs58&index=11

Lover talk –https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oA1-KvSaLL4&index=10&list=PLvgWYx0ae1cAqdaNvwB5k24DwEm-Rfs58

Warrior talk –https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itstCBJKaoo&index=9&list=PLvgWYx0ae1cAqdaNvwB5k24DwEm-Rfs58

Shadow Work information:

http://shiatsuandshadowworkbristol.co.uk

http://shadowwork.com

 

Examining our judgements of others

 

This is the last in a series of five posts about communication. In Shadow Work we use a model for authentic communication which requires 5 different aspects to be communicated. These are:

The Facts What actually happened

Our Judgements What we think or believe about what happened

Our Feelings How we feel about what happened

Our Boundary What is not ok for us

Our Want What we want from the other person

(It might be helpful to look at the previous four Communication posts in conjunction with this one. Please follow these links: how can we communicate with authenticity and depth , communicating without arguing , communicating our vulnerability with dignity , communicating our boundaries)

In this post we are introducing a final voluntary part of the communication model, which has the potential to really deepen our understanding of ourselves and our shadow sides. It can also lead us to a deeper connection with the other person if we choose to share our thoughts and insights with them.

EXAMINING OUR JUDGEMENTS

There are three ways that we can explore what we have said in the judgements section of our communication in order to learn more about ourselves and others and to deepen our communication.

1) CAN WE OWN ANY OF OUR JUDGEMENTS?

This part asks the questions:
Which of the judgements that you have made of the ‘other’ can you own for yourself?

As Robert Bly has pointed out, we all go around with a little projector in our head which takes aspects of ourselves and projects them out on to others. We sometimes therefore see our own shadows in other people whilst not recognising them in ourselves. (Please note, this doesn’t mean this quality is NOT present in the other person – it may be – but we focus very strongly on the possibility of it being present in the other person when it may be of deeper value to acknowledge its existence in ourselves.)

Here’s an example. Imagine a woman Jane met a good friend for lunch and she found that her friend talked all the way through their meeting. There was no opportunity for Jane to talk. No space for her. She finds herself getting quite upset afterwards about the way the meeting went. So when she’s reflecting on what happened Jane could use the Shadow Work communication model to lay out her thoughts and feelings as follows:

Data: We met for lunch and you ( my friend ) talked about the difficulties you’d been having at work.

Judgements: You talked a lot. There was no space for me to talk, you didn’t seem to care about me. You were selfish. You only met me for yourself, so you could vent on me. I ended up with a sense of despair and I just wanted to escape from you! (NB when sharing our Judgements we always make an effort to let the other person know that these are our responses to the situation, they may not be true, they are our reactions and may not reflect in any way on the other person. Please see the previous 4 articles for more information on how to phrase these conversations.)

Feelings: I feel sad.

Boundary: It’s not ok with me that you didn’t ask how I was or give me a chance to speak.

Want: I want our meetings to be more even handed, so that you give me an equal opportunity to talk.

Now, looking at the judgements section she could ask herself which of the judgements that she made of her friend can she own herself.  She judged her friend as being selfish, just meeting her to vent, and not being interested in her. If she honestly looks at herself, she can ask ‘Do I ever exhibit these characteristics that I am judging in her?’ Looking carefully at her past behaviour she may think ‘I could see that I have sometimes approached conversations in this way, really wanting to talk about something that’s important to me, venting my feelings and not interested in listening to the other person. Also, I have to admit that in those moments I’m not really caring about the person opposite me, I am not giving space to hear what is going on for them. If I am honest, I can admit that I am harshly judging my friend for behaving in a way I have sometimes behaved in the past.’ Sometimes the judgements we make of others may not reflect on us in any way, but in this example for Jane they definitely did, so it is always worth exploring this.

It’s worth taking this a bit further by looking at the final two judgements as well. Feeling despair and wanting to escape are quite strong reactions. What was going on for Jane that this experience was so overwhelming for her? She may consider this and think, ‘I came from a large noisy family, and I can see that the only way I could get any ‘airtime’ was to talk loudly and constantly, and so dominate the little conversation space that was available to me. And I can see that maybe I have continued this childhood dynamic in my adult life, fearing that if I do not dominate the conversation I might not get to talk at all. And if that happens I feel lonely and despairing just as I did as a child when I couldn’t make myself heard, just as I did with my friend who talked a lot that day.’

So, here Jane has turned a difficult situation into an opportunity for self learning, and an opportunity for deepening her connection with her friend. Jane might have decided to run off and never see this friend again. Instead she has used the Shadow Work model to reveal clearly to herself a way in which she behaves and how that behaviour originated. She has pulled back her projections from her friend. She can now go ahead and speak to her friend about this in an open way, sharing her experience and her judgements and owning the parts of the judgements that apply to her. She can share her childhood experiences with her friend so that her friend gets to understand why Jane responded in the way she did. Jane has owned up to her own behaviour in similar circumstances so she can now take steps to correct it. Her friend has had the opportunity to see deeply into Jane, right back to her childhood, and can understand her better. This means they have enhanced their connection in a situation which otherwise might have permanently damaged their friendship. When Jane owns her judgements in this way it makes it much more likely that her friend will be able to listen openly to Jane’s experience and will make an effort to allow space for Jane to speak in future in conversations.

Such a level of introspection is sometimes only possible after all our thoughts and feelings have been expressed and heard by the other person and when we feel calmer and more reflective, so this section may be reserved for later on in a conversation, or even on another day. It may also be something we wish to do only alone in order to learn about ourselves and may not choose to share our thoughts with the other person. Examining our judgements can often be a first step towards exploring and healing what we have held in Shadow.

Of course, it may be that when they talk Jane’s friend fully acknowledges that she talked a lot on that day and that she is aware she was being quite demanding in getting her own needs met. This is covered in part 3 of this article, but this doesn’t in any way take away from Jane’s process of self reflection. A different person may not have had the reaction Jane did to her friend’s behaviour. Someone else may have felt happy to listen and support, trusting that there would be space for them to speak another time. Another person might have felt really honoured that their friend trusted them enough to talk to them at such length and they may have been pleased, thinking that the meeting had deepened the friendship. So it is really helpful to acknowledge that others may have had a completely different reaction to the same situation and that our particular reaction has something to teach us about ourselves.

2) WHO IS STANDING BEHING THE PERSON YOU ARE JUDGING?

If we have experienced distressing or traumatic situations in our early lives we are likely to develop a part of ourselves that tries to protect us from ever experiencing such a situation again. One way we may protect ourselves is to look out for similar situations and try to alert ourselves to them early on. In this way we hope to have time to take action to avoid the same thing happening again. This part of us can become very hyper-vigilant. Such alertness may have been extremely helpful during our childhood and may well have kept us safe, but is likely be out of date now as we operate in the adult world.

This vigilant part of us can be behind some of the judgements we make. For example, if a man’s partner is an hour late to meet him for lunch there may be many reasons. However, without further evidence the judgements he makes (the conclusions he draws or the fears he has) are likely to reflect his childhood experiences in some way:
– He may start to think his partner has had an accident or fallen ill or been hurt.
– He may think they no longer love him, or that they’ve found someone else they’d prefer to spend time with.
– He may think they’ve been terribly thoughtless and just couldn’t be bothered to respect him by arriving on time.
– He may think they’re trying to manipulate him in some way rather than communicating directly. Perhaps they would prefer a different cafe or they disapprove of spending money on eating lunch out.
– He may think they are trying to punish him for something – perhaps something he said or did the night before.
– He may assume it is his mistake – perhaps he got the time wrong – or the cafe? He may fear their anger at his error.

What would your thoughts be in this situation? Would they be similar to one of the above, or something different – or would you wait calmly without making any judgements of the situation?

Whatever response you have is likely to reflect your childhood experiences. For example, if you experienced a parent leaving when you were young then you may think something along the lines of the second judgement listed – that your partner doesn’t love you anymore, or has chosen someone else over you. If a parent or family member died when you were young you may think thoughts along the lines of the first statement. If your parents were very critical and you were often blamed and punished for things then your judgement might be similar to one of the last two statements.

So when we ask who is standing behind the person you are judging we are asking who originally treated you in this way that you are now judging this person to have treated you? If this man’s mother had abandoned him when he was little he might respond with the second judgement and think that his partner doesn’t love him any more if they are late. He might fear they’ve chosen someone else over him. In this case the person ‘standing behind’ his partner is his mother. He is not seeing his partner clearly for the person she is, because he is viewing his partner’s behaviours through the lens of his previous experience with his mother. He is looking at his partner but seeing his mother standing behind her. We all make judgements in this way – it is automatic. However the more we can become aware of this process the more we can free ourselves up to see other people for who they really are and to understand that their actions may have very different causes to those that we have guessed at.

3) DOES THE OTHER PERSON AGREE WITH YOUR JUDGEMENTS?

Last but not least it can save a lot of agonising and soul searching if you simply take the time to check out your judgements with the other person involved. This isn’t always possible, and is likely to hold some risks for you, but when you have the chance to talk openly with the other person it can be tremendously helpful simply to ask them if you are correct or not.

We could go back to the example above where the man’s partner is late. Let’s call his partner Jo. Once Jo has arrived he could check out what was going on for her and why she was late. For example, if he had been thinking that she was punishing him for something he had done the night before he could say something like:
‘When you arrived late today I had a lot of thoughts and feelings swirling around. I know this may be nothing to do with what was actually going on for you, but I started to think that maybe you’d decided to arrive late to punish me for what I did last night. I thought maybe you wanted to get back at me. I know that might not be the case, but I just wanted to check it out.’
This will probably feel quite scary for him to say, however there is real potential here to open up deep and honest communication between the two. It can be very helpful to have a reality check at this stage. If Jo agrees that she might have been trying to get back at him, (perhaps even without being fully aware herself of what she was doing), then this can open up a conversation about what happened the night before and the fact that it is not yet resolved for her. It allows a possibility for them to resolve it through an open and honest discussion rather than allowing resentments to build. If however she reassures him that she was genuinely delayed and it was in no way her attention to punish him then this can calm his fears and prevent the thought from lingering in his mind and causing difficulties for them later on. It can also give Jo an insight in to his thoughts and feelings that will bring the two of them closer, and may result in her changing her behaviour and contacting him in future to let him know when she’s delayed to reassure him that everything’s ok between them.

Please visit http://www.shiatsuandshadowworkbristol.co.uk for further information about Shadow Work.

 

Communicating our Vulnerability with Dignity.

In the last blog we explore the first two parts of the Authentic Communication model – facts and judgements. You may want to take a look at this before you read on…

http://exploringtheshadow.co.uk/2016/01/13/communicating-without-arguing-2/

In this blog we are going to explore sections 3 and 5 of the model: ‘Feelings’ and ‘Wants’.

Please note, now that we’re working with 4 different aspects of the model altogether – facts, judgements, feelings and wants, statements from each different section have been colour coded for clarity. Facts are written in red, judgements in green, feelings in blue and wants in orange.

The Feelings and Wants sections are the two sections most likely to expose our vulnerability. Most of us find the idea of vulnerability pretty scary, and because of this we are likely to avoid the Feelings and Wants parts in our communication. This may not be conscious, and even when we believe we’re being totally honest, you will see the Feelings and Wants aspects are rarely stated clearly. The paradox is that it is only in exposing our vulnerability that we really share of ourself with another – and is that not what communication is really about? If we really want to be heard then we will need to risk showing our vulnerability and this means including our feelings and our wants in the conversation.

OUR FEELINGS.

There are many ways we avoid saying what we’re feeling. Some common examples are:

We may give our Judgements, ‘You’re a liar’, ‘You’re cruel’, and assume the other person picks up how we’re feeling from this. We may be shouting. It may be ‘obvious’ that we’re angry. But how often do we actually state that? ‘I feel angry!’

We may give these judgements ‘You don’t love me anymore’, ‘You’re always at work’, and assume the other person knows what we’ll be feeling about that. We may be crying or looking upset when we give these judgements, but how often do we say, ‘I feel really sad’ ?

Equally we may make judgements that show we feel frightened. ‘You’re going to ask me to leave’. ‘You don’t want me working on this project’. It may seem obvious to us that we find this a scary thought, but how often do we actually say ‘I feel frightened about this.’ ?

INCLUDING OUR FEELINGS.

In our model we encourage you to say, in one simple statement, the feeling, or feelings you have. We also encourage you to stick to what we see as the four most fundamental feelings:

Fear.

Joy.

Anger.

Sadness.

Below are some examples which include the facts, the judgement and then the feeling. So that the separate sections are clear we’ve coloured the facts red, the judgements green and the feelings blue.

If the fact is that our partner was in the pub when they had told us they were at work we might say:

Yesterday when you were in the pub when you’d said you were at work I thought that you had lied to me and I felt really angry.’

Or, if the fact is that our boss didn’t return our call.

‘You didn’t return my call yesterday. Because of this I started to think that you don’t want to work with me any more but you don’t know how to tell me. I felt frightened.’

Or if my son wanted to spend Christmas with his dad this year instead of me I might say.

‘When you told me you want to spend Christmas with Dad this year it started me thinking that you might prefer being at his house, and thinking that makes me feel really sad.’

We hope you can see how adding the feeling so clearly deepens the level of communication, and also the level of vulnerability. We may not want to communicate this deeply with everyone, but if we really want to be understood and heard then including our feeling can really help.

OUR WANTS.

So far so good. We’ve said everything now haven’t we? No! This is the mistake so many of us make so often. We have actually left out the most important part of the conversation – what we actually want from the other person.

Usually we are communicating because we want something to be different. Or sometimes it is simply because we want to be heard and understood. Whatever our reason we want SOMETHING from the other person. Yet wanting something from someone is potentially a very vulnerable position to be in. So without really realising it we may slide off actually saying what we want.

For example, if John’s partner is in the pub when she’d told him she was at work he may be really upset with her, He may tell her all his judgements and feelings – but what does he actually want from her? It may seem to him that she ‘should’ know what he wants, or that it is screamingly obvious what he wants – but it is still, we believe, the responsibility of the person communicating to state clearly what they want.

Does he want her to tell him honestly where she is all the time? Or does he want her not to flirt with other men? Or does he want her to come home to him if she’s not at work? Or does he want her to give up drinking?

He may think she knows what he wants, but she may really NOT know. So it is important for him to state his want clearly. It is important to state it as clearly as possible. It’s not necessarily helpful to say ‘I don’t want you to lie to me ever again.’ Or ‘I just want you to be more responsible’. These are too vague, and include hidden judgements of the other person.

Now, of course, if we ask for something we don’t necessarily get it. This is why stating our want makes us so vulnerable. We have to state it knowing we may not actually get it. This can be the reason why many people don’t clearly state their want. It can just be too painful.

INCLUDING ALL OF OURSELF.

So to conclude, let’s look at an example including facts, judgements, feelings and wants. Let’s go back to the example where John’s partner was in the pub when he thought she was at work. Different people will have very different thoughts, feelings and wants in response to this situation, but one example might be:

‘When you were in the pub the other day and you’d told me you were at work. (Facts. He may want to double check that she agrees with this as a fact before we go on). I thought you had deliberately lied to me. I started to believe you were avoiding being with me and you’re not enjoying my company at the moment. (John’s thoughts and judgements). I felt angry and also frightened. (His feelings). I’d really like you to tell me honestly how you’re feeling about our relationship and if there’s anything you’re finding difficult at the moment. (His want from her).

This is clear communication and offers many opportunities for John’s partner to respond, and for communication to flow between then. It may be that she is having difficulties with the relationship, or it may simply be that a colleague invited her for a drink and she fancied going. There are many different possibilities, John can’t know the truth until they begin communicating, and beginning a conversation in this way gives a good chance of them getting to the bottom of things and understanding each other more deeply.

To watch a talk about Shadow Work go to

http://www.shiatsuandshadowworkbristol.co.uk and see the talks on the home page

Communicating Without Arguing.

 

In order to communicate fully with another person it is important that we are able to express what is going on for us honestly. However, this can often lead to an ‘argument’, with our thoughts and feelings being denied by the other as they respond with pain and a desire to justify or excuse themselves. 

The Authentic Communication model introduced in the last blog provides a way where we are more likely to be heard and understood by the other person, rather than argued with. 

What is the magic formula?

Well, there is no magic bullet, and good communication relies on a willingness by both parties to be open to speaking truthfully and hearing what the other person has to say. However, using this model can greatly increase the chances of you being heard and reduce the chances of it descending in to futile argument. Here’s how:

In the last communication blog I gave a brief outline of the Authentic Communication model and the five different aspects. (you may wish to take another look at this blog : http://exploringtheshadow.co.uk/2014/04/04/how-can-we-communicate-with-authenticity-and-depth/ ).
We believe good communication requires 5 different aspects to be communicated. These are:

 

  • The Data. The facts of the situation that we can both agree on.
  • Our Judgements. The thoughts, beliefs, ideas and judgements that we have about this data.
  • Our Feeling. How we feel in this situation.
  • Our Boundary. What wasn’t ok for us.
  • Our Want. What we would like from the other person.

 Today we are going to deal with the first two of these: The facts, and our Judgements. (We’ll explore feelings, boundary and wants in future blogs.). Much difficulty in communication arises when we cannot clearly separate the facts themselves from the conclusions that we draw and the judgements we make in the light of these facts.

 We are all hard wired to make quick judgements of a situation for our own safety. For example, if a tiger is running towards us we will most likely make the judgement that we are in danger, and we will run away as fast as we can. It won’t serve us to sit around and examine our judgements. That can be done later once we’re safely out of harms way. However, the thought ‘My  life is in danger’ WAS only a Judgement. It wasn’t a fact. The tiger may not have been hungry, the tiger may not enjoy the taste of human flesh, or she may have been running towards a different target, an antelope standing behind us for example. Or the tiger may have had no teeth or may just have wanted to play. The only FACT we knew in that moment was that the tiger was running towards us.

Similarly, for our emotional and physical safety in every day life we may make quick judgements of a situation that aren’t necessarily correct:

Fact: He’s raising his voice.

Judgement: He’s going to hit me!

Fact: She’s turning away as she talks.

Judgement: She must be lying!

Fact: He was late for our date.

Judgement: He doesn’t care about me!

Fact: She wants to see her friend.

Judgement: She doesn’t want to be with me! 
These are the kind of judgements that we believe are worth expressing as judgements rather than facts. This allows for a more mature exploration of what happened, where the other person is less likely to take offense and more likely to be able to hear what is going on for us. Can we step back for just a moment and allow the possibility that our judgement might not be correct? Just allowing this tiniest chink of possibility to open up can make a world of difference to our communication and our relationships.

It’s important to realise that we all have judgements. They are part of human nature. We have a right to have them, and at times they may save us from some very difficult or dangerous situations. However, it’s also important to recognise that they are ONLY JUDGEMENTS. They may be true, but they may also NOT be true. In effective communication it is good to keep an open mind on this.

So in our Authentic Communication model we work hard to separate the facts from our judgements, and to communicate them separately. We also find it helpful to get agreement from the other person about the basic facts, the data, so that we know we are talking about something that we both agree on.

Let’s take a look at what we mean. Here we have something that may be given as a fact.

I might start a heated conversation with my boyfriend saying:

‘You didn’t turn up for our date last night.’

This sounds like a clear cut fact. But hang on a minute. What if I got the date wrong, and it’s actually tomorrow night, or maybe I got the venue wrong, or the time? He may not agree with this as a fact at all. So I could start the conversation a different way.  I might say:

‘I was sitting in Joey’s wine bar at 8 o’clock last night expecting you to arrive and you didn’t turn up.’

It is more likely he will find this a fact that he can agree with.

I may go on then to add a judgement to this. I may say:

‘You’re not to be trusted.’

Now, I certainly have a right to my judgements around what happened. I just need to recognise that they’re not necessarily true. There are many different judgements I could have about him not turning up. Maybe:

‘When you didn’t turn up I thought you were deliberately trying to hurt me.’

or

‘When you didn’t turn up I thought you were with Sarah.’

or

‘When you didn’t turn up I thought you’d been in an awful accident.’

or

‘When you didn’t turn up I thought that perhaps you’re not someone I can trust.’

…or any other number of different judgements I may have formed as a conclusion to this original data.

Our judgements are best expressed as ‘I thought…’ or ‘I believed….’ ‘or ‘I assumed…’. This gives a small gap, a breathing space in the conversation. It opens up the possibility that the other person could agree with or refute your judgements. They are not facts. They are open for discussion.

So, with time to think a bit more I might say:

‘I was sitting in Joey’s wine bar at 8 o’clock last night expecting you to arrive and you didn’t turn up. When you didn’t turn up I began to think that maybe I can’t really trust you. I know this isn’t necessarily true, but it’s the sense I made of you not turning up. It’s really important to me to talk it through with you.’ 

This is a more authentic start to our conversation. (It doesn’t mean that I don’t have strong feelings about what happened, or that I don’t want things to be different. We’ll come on to that in the next blog.)

Below are some examples of judgements that we may confuse with data. The first statement in each pair contains a judgement. The second statement gives the pure facts from which these judgements have been formed. Facts we often think of as something you could record or film. At the very least the facts must be something both people agree about. Our judgements are the conclusions we draw from these facts.

Judgement. ‘You hurt me’.

Fact. ‘You said ‘I like Sarah more than I like you’.’

Judgement. ‘You were late’.

Fact. ‘You arrived at quarter past seven and I expected you to come at seven.’

Judgement. ‘You weren’t listening.’

Fact. ‘Your eyes were looking down and you were writing in your notebook.’

Judgement. ‘You were insensitive.’

Fact. ‘You said John looked fat in his new top.’

Judgement. ‘You were rude.’

Fact. ‘You sat down in the last chair and there was nowhere for Jo to sit.’

Judgement. ‘You were unreasonable.’

Fact. ‘You said you didn’t like the food I’d cooked.’

The simple change of separating out the facts from your judgements can make the world of difference to the quality of your communication, and makes it much more likely that you will be heard and understood. (It doesn’t mean the other person will like what they hear, but they’re less likely to have such a strong reaction.) The other person now has a chance to understand clearly the behaviour that led to your judgement of them. It is worth trying this next time you need to speak to someone about something that you fear may be emotionally charged. You may find it leads to a more constructive conversation. It is less likely to lead to an argument as the ‘facts’ are something you both agree on, and the judgements are owned by you and clearly stated as judgements, which you acknowledge may or may not be true.

I will explore feelings, boundaries and wants in my next blogs, so that you will then, if you wish, be able to use the model in full.

If you would like to find further information on Shadow Work visit:

http://www.shiatsuandshadowworkbristol.co.uk