Request for information from Nancy and Marian

[Nancy]

Hello All,

Marian and I are writing an article about where clean language comes from, and the influences that lead David to his ideas.

We would welcome any information you have about the different philosophies and programmes that David had previously studied.

Thanks,

Nancy

[Corrie van Wijk]

Clean Language and other ideas originated in David's brain and emerged from a lifetime of studying, exercising, practising and developing. It would be hard to establish a relationship in terms of what he did previously, as if there would be a cause-and-effect. In my view David and his work are best honoured by sharing your experience of him.

Other than that, the world needs to know how important his work is, there are a lot of people out there that desperatily need help.

[forumadmin]

We are all grieving in our own ways and honouring David may take many forms.

Researching an article about where Clean Language comes from and 'what happened just before?' seems to me to be very much in line with the aims of cleanforum and also to honour his memory by exploring his legacy to us all.

cleanforum welcomes such discussion.

[Nancy]

Marian and I agree that the world needs to know!

One of our aims for the article is to pin down some of the references and scientific background to clean, so that we can get better at writing it in an academic framework - thus sharing David's ideas with a wider audience.

When I talk about clean to other psychologists, therapists etc they often say "oh that reminds me of systemic family therapy / rogerian psychotherapy / non-directive interviewing [etc etc]"

We'd like to pin down exactly what the theoretical basis was, so that we can say how Clean Language builds on those existing knowledge sets. The referencing is exactly what a lot of the world will want to know before they can take an article seriously.

We have had this planned for several months and would have very much liked to discuss this with David himself. We are now relying on the knowledge of our colleagues to send us ideas of different theorists to research so that we can honour the people who David learned from, before we honour his work.

We hope you all can help us track his influences.

Thanks, Nancy

[Corrie van Wijk]

It seems strange to me that someone only could be taken seriously if he builds on the ideas of others, which I suspect David very often did not.

But I wish you all the luck you need, and I'd be happy to co-read.

Corrie

[Steve Saunders]

As Steve Briggs has written, David's mentor made a huge impression.

However, every single aspect of a person's life informs their work. Only a full biography would bring out the influences.

For some strange reason David did ask "where to people go when they dissociate?" He told me that it took him months-years to even find this question, and that the answer sponsored his work thereafter.

Why did he ask this question? Because he knew people lost light in their eyes - and his eyes were so bright! He could see something was missing. Indeed he pondered as to whether someone could come back "if all the light had gone". He thought not.

Marian - I live only a few miles away, come to Glastonbury and I'll tell you what I know.

love Steven

[deborahh]

What an interesting area of study, Nancy and Marian.

I think that Cei may be able to help you on many of David's early influences.
A couple of definitive moments in my understanding of David's work may be of interest:
1. At a therapists' workshop in the Lake District in 2000, David explained that they had done a lot of work specifically in the treatment of Multiple Personality Disorder (now Dissociative Identity Disorder). They used a completely different approach to those prevalent in psychological treatments of the time (70s/80s). Most clinical approaches tried to align the various personalities (or dissociated parts) around a central persona (which we can call person A). David and Cei instead allowed each personality to have its own voice/space/identity. Instead of there a continued dominance of the personality of A (which holds the others in submission and, in effect, maintains the strangely scaled ABC world) the personality became a whole functioning system (like a team, which can develop a team identity). The clean approach was a way to enable each personality (often ones which had been subjugated for a long time) to have their own 'voice'. These could then each realign themselves, as a system, without a top-down rearrangement from A. David was fond of saying; 'Don't ask him/her (meaning the person at A presenting their problem or solution), they are the only ones that don't know anything'
The metaphor work was a way to give a 'personality' within the system its voice and identity.

2. David told me once that he had been speaking to R.D. Lang, about the eminent psychiatrist's work in the field of schizophrenia. R.D. Lang suggested to David that instead of trying to cure people and force them into some notion of sanity, as they do in psychiatric wings, why doesn't David do something different and take them off to a hotel somewhere and actually allow them to go mad in a supported way! He started Eldon with this very idea in mind, apparently. The supportive way was to ask clean question without interfering and enable clients to have a space and boundaried sessions in which to do this. Eventually their personality system self-rearranges as all the parts take on a new order of alignment.


Steve's perspective about David being driven by the question of where people go when they dissociate, is one I have also heard and would agree with. This was underlying the development of the use of space and metaphor to 'hold' all these disparate parts. The least helpful position (in space/time or metaphorically) was the one at A. The starting position which tried to run the system.

He also said that he had found an answer to where people go when they dissociate; "Back from whence they came" in other words, we are all struggling to re-attain the pristine condition pre-trauma (T-1). As a result of whatever Ts we have experienced, we have become fractured/disintegrated and disocciated. Each of these elements exists in it's own microsystem with its own values/ways of working and personality.

The ABC world was not a new idea for David in 2005. It was another way of explaining the work he was doing when I first met him in 2000. The philosophy and intention was the same but the tools (such as clean questions) became more refined.

Unlike Steve, I don't see that there is a difference between the metaphor work and the space work because, of course a position in space is another metaphor for an aspect of the personality. It is just one that is perhaps easier to navigate and certainly enable the somatic body to take part which is definitely at least one element of the system which constitutes the human being.

This is turning into rather a long email so I will finish up here but I would be very happy to discuss this further with anyone who is interested. Steve, thanks for your email and I would like to stay in touch so pls let me know if your contact info changes.

happy days to all

Deborah

[deborahh]

What an interesting area of study, Nancy and Marian.

I think that Cei may be able to help you on many of David's early influences.
A couple of definitive moments in my understanding of David's work may be of interest:
1. At a therapists' workshop in the Lake District in 2000, David explained that they had done a lot of work specifically in the treatment of Multiple Personality Disorder (now Dissociative Identity Disorder). They used a completely different approach to those prevalent in psychological treatments of the time (70s/80s). Most clinical approaches tried to align the various personalities (or dissociated parts) around a central persona (which we can call person A). David and Cei instead allowed each personality to have its own voice/space/identity. Instead of there a continued dominance of the personality of A (which holds the others in submission and, in effect, maintains the strangely scaled ABC world) the personality became a whole functioning system (like a team, which can develop a team identity). The clean approach was a way to enable each personality (often ones which had been subjugated for a long time) to have their own 'voice'. These could then each realign themselves, as a system, without a top-down rearrangement from A. David was fond of saying; 'Don't ask him/her (meaning the person at A presenting their problem or solution), they are the only ones that don't know anything'
The metaphor work was a way to give a 'personality' within the system its voice and identity.

2. David told me once that he had been speaking to R.D. Lang, about the eminent psychiatrist's work in the field of schizophrenia. R.D. Lang suggested to David that instead of trying to cure people and force them into some notion of sanity, as they do in psychiatric wings, why doesn't David do something different and take them off to a hotel somewhere and actually allow them to go mad in a supported way! He started Eldon with this very idea in mind, apparently. The supportive way was to ask clean question without interfering and enable clients to have a space and boundaried sessions in which to do this. Eventually their personality system self-rearranges as all the parts take on a new order of alignment.


Steve's perspective about David being driven by the question of where people go when they dissociate, is one I have also heard and would agree with. This was underlying the development of the use of space and metaphor to 'hold' all these disparate parts. The least helpful position (in space/time or metaphorically) was the one at A. The starting position which tried to run the system.

He also said that he had found an answer to where people go when they dissociate; "Back from whence they came" in other words, we are all struggling to re-attain the pristine condition pre-trauma (T-1). As a result of whatever Ts we have experienced, we have become fractured/disintegrated and disocciated. Each of these elements exists in it's own microsystem with its own values/ways of working and personality. Together these elements form a greater system. There are mulitple personalities within the system but the aim is perhaps to allow the personality OF the greater system to emerge. When this happens the self is no longer in conflict but it is integrated and aligned. 'A' no longer exisits but has become part of the system.

The ABC world was not a new idea for David in 2005. It was another way of explaining the work he was doing when I first met him in 2000. The philosophy and intention was the same but the tools (such as clean questions) became more refined.

Unlike Steve, I don't see that there is a difference between the metaphor work and the space work because, of course a position in space is another metaphor for an aspect of the personality. It is just one that is perhaps easier to navigate and certainly enable the somatic body to take part which is definitely at least one element of the system which constitutes the human being.

This is turning into rather a long email so I will finish up here but I would be very happy to discuss this further with anyone who is interested. Steve, thanks for your email and I would like to stay in touch so pls let me know if your contact info changes.

happy days to all

Deborah

[caitlinwalker]

I can't tell you too much about the earliest influences - I would suggest Cei is your best bet, plus some of the american crew.
It would be good to pin down what he actually studied at college/uni because that was still up for debate even between his family and Dafanie and I. If someone knows FOR SURE, that may be interesting.
Although I believe David to be a creative genius I'm also clear that he studied ideas that went before him and gave credit to the genius creators he'd read or worked with. He never claimed his ideas came out of nowhere.
I can gather together some of the inspirational moments I observed him having in the last few years when he was with us and how they came about. That may shed some light on the way he gathered ideas before they synthesised. I'll chat to Shaun and compile a number of instances. I'll bet lots of people have a number of these.

[Nancy]

This is really useful information - thanks everyone!

[Judy]

Hi Nancy, I think you already have the 'Theoretical underpinnings' article I put together based on James and Wendy's input? If not, the link is http://www.cleanchange.co.uk/Articles/Presuppositions1.php

Judy