Читать книгу The Myth of the Shiksa and Other Essays - Edwin H. Friedman - Страница 9

FRIEDMAN: Satan, let me begin by thanking you for your willingness to grant this interview.

SATAN: It’s my pleasure, just as long as you don’t make fun of me. I can’t stand it when people don’t take me seriously.

__________

Originally conceived for the keynote address at the “Dialogue 94” National Conference of Pastoral Counselors, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, May 1994.

You mean like C. S. Lewis or George Bernard Shaw?

On the contrary; they captured my spirit completely, unlike that Job fellow. You know, he still doesn’t accept the fact that I exist.

Why should that bother you?

You’re right. I used to think I could throw people off course only if they believed in me; now I find it works better if they deny my existence completely.

I’d like to start with a rather simple question. I’ve always wondered why you began with Eve. Why didn’t you go straight to Adam and give him the fruit yourself?

That is not such a simple question. I really didn’t expect her to give it to him. That’s precisely what I was afraid she would do.

You were using paradox?

Yes, but I was new at it. I had yet to refine my technique. The outcome was the exact opposite of what I expected; why would I have wanted them to know the difference between good and evil?

Go on.

I could see right from “the beginning” —the second version is correct, by the way — they were created simultaneously — that the male of this species was not going to be the more aggressive one. Frankly, Adam was passive as hell. He would have stayed in that Garden till the end of time. Eve, on the other hand, had fire in her, desire, a sense of adventure, curiosity. And I realized if I was going to have to choose between an eternal struggle with this new species or absolute boredom forever, I’d better choose the former. Besides, the Creator wanted it that way.

He was using you?

If you must know, unlike some of the other gods, such as Mars or Venus or Neptune, this One makes life very difficult for himself. He wants his creatures to grow.

Then there are other gods?

Not in this universe. They all originally trained here and then went on to create their own worlds. Like Elohim they created their creatures in their own image. The difference was in the problem of reproduction. In Venus’s world everyone loves all the time; in Mars’s world they are perpetually at war. But Elohim wanted to try something different. The Creator saw himself as a God of individuation, of differentiation, of process; life was always to be in the act of becoming; the creatures might even be seen as co-creators. The problem was you can’t clone differentiation no matter how well differentiated the primary copy. Every parent knows that. So the critical component in the plan was that life was always to be challenging, and the secret to the process of becoming was in a creature’s response to challenge.

Then you were really working for the Creator. That must have been before the Fall.

Actually, I slipped.

Right into the choir, I understand.

But to get back to your original question — why I gave advice to Eve rather than going directly to Adam — I knew I would never be able to stop the Creator’s overall plan, but I thought I might really be able to frustrate it, if I could screw up relationships.

So you created the first marital triangle?

Exactly. Why, if I had gone directly to Adam, or had dealt with Eve one on one, they both might have started dealing with one another in very mature ways. But I saw that if somehow I could get all caught up in their relationship, I might keep them stuck forever. And I am proud to say that most counselors have followed in my footsteps ever since.

I’m not sure I’ll include that comment in the final version.

Anyway, the outcome was more than I could have hoped for. Each one immediately started to blame rather than take responsibility for their own response. I couldn’t believe it. All either one would have had to do was take a stand, any well-defined position on what they believed, own it, and I’d have been out of there. I’d have lost all my influence.

They were both only-children.

No. No. It was much deeper than that. I sensed immediately that it would show up everywhere, almost as though it were a natural part of their basic makeup, a flaw in creation, perhaps. Only-children have no monopoly on immaturity. But the exciting thing was I now knew the key to retarding the evolution of the entire species. Something that would work no matter what the age, the gender, the race, or the ethnic background.

You seem to be suggesting that if there were some original sin that has been transmitted down through the generations, it was not an act of disobedience, which, after all, could also be seen as an act of differentiation, but their response after they had disobeyed.

You got it.

Aren’t you afraid to tell me this? I mean, if the truth got out, things might swing against you.

Are you kidding? The failure of humans to take responsibility for their own emotional being and destiny is so much a part of their heritage that I can’t imagine how their simply knowing it would change things.

But that’s precisely what most counselors are engaged in doing. Trying to make people aware, giving them advice, pointing out their mistakes.

My best ploys.

Wait a minute, are you saying that you try to retard the evolution of the human species by tempting the helping professions into trying to help?

I do have to admit that sometimes when I am absolutely drenched in the self-sacrifice all around me, I get to thinking maybe the Holy One put troubled people on earth in order to give the good people something to do, but it’s a bit more complicated than that. Actually, I have a whole series of maneuvers, and I have to be resilient enough to adapt to the age, but, basically, I always work in the same direction.

What’s that?

To prevent people from reaching the essential position that is at the beginning of any mature religious philosophy.

Namely?

I will not make my salvation dependent on the functioning of others. And that works two ways. It means not using other people as the way to one’s own salvation, and it means not saving other people as the way to one’s own salvation.

That almost sounds like a philosophy of parenting.

Of course; they’re congruent. That’s why I keep parents all focused on the child instead of on themselves, getting caught up in issues like what’s the right method, who’s got the best statistical data, what’s the right proportion of leniency and strictness?

Sounds like counselors.

As I said, they’re congruent. . . . In all events, by keeping parents — and counselors — focused on the child, particularly on symptoms, I help them avoid the essential position at the beginning of a mature philosophy of parenting.

... and that is?

That the children who are doing best in this world — and by best I don’t necessarily mean the highest grades or the most awards but rather those who are working through the natural struggles of growing and being with the least amount of reactivity towards others — the children who are doing best in this world are those whose parents made them least important to their own salvation.

That sure is an interesting parallel between theology and therapy.

And let me add that the Creator himself struggled for centuries before he was able to work that one through. But, as I said, that’s what distinguishes the Holy One from all the other gods.

I’d like to hear how you go about diverting the human species from seeing what’s important.

As long as you give me my due.

Guaranteed, but before we leave the Garden I do have one trivial point of curiosity.

Yes?

I’ve always wondered what kind of fruit was really on that tree. I mean, ever since that damn painting everyone assumes it was an apple, but the text only says fruit. Was it a pear, an orange, a tangerine, a grape, a pomegranate, or was it really an apple?

It was an avocado.

An avocado? Why on earth — pardon the expression — an avocado?

I wanted them to have a yen for things that were fattening.

Your irreverence is outrageous.

Remaining authentic is very important to me.

Let’s get back to your methods. Just how do you ply your trade?

First, you must remember that I rarely do things head-on. Direct confrontation is not my bag. I saw immediately that this species with its immense intelligence and capacity for knowledge could never be led astray simply by ideas. Therefore, I always work with their intelligence rather than against it. Perversity is my game. In fact, I learned rather quickly that I could use their intelligence, and their good will, I might add, against themselves.

Could you give an example?

My primary tactic is to get flesh and blood to focus on the wrong information, on data, for example, rather than maturity, or on empathy rather than responsibility, or on self as a category of narcissism rather than a matter of integrity. I was going to say that things were different centuries ago when my main area of interest was religion. . . .

You’ve gone elsewhere?

Oh yes. Now I’m primarily into counseling, any kind of counseling — marriage counseling, family counseling, pastoral counseling, organizational counseling, family business counseling. The more I can get people to rely on expertise, the more it atrophies their capacity to be decisive. The rise of the consulting industry today is a direct result of my efforts to make people afraid to take a stand. I started to say that it was different back then, before I moved over into therapy, but as we speak I begin to realize it really wasn’t.

What is it that hasn’t changed?

I still infiltrate by seducing people into focusing on the wrong issues, and flesh and blood still responds in the same way. It absolutely cannot resist the temptation. Over the centuries, the institutions of salvation may change form (saints, holy works, sacred rites, criteria for heresy) but the problems are the same, the spectrum of approaches is the same — so insight vs. behavior replaces faith vs. works — those false dichotomies work every time. And the fact of the matter is I’m just as successful in thwarting growth now as I was then.

You were going to explain how you go about this.

To begin with, you must remember what I said before. The Creator of this universe, unlike other gods, was not content to clone his image. Being a God of process, the Holy One wanted his creatures to be constantly in the act of becoming. This necessitated a world of absolute freedom, and it meant that the key to life was the response to challenge, but — and I want to emphasize this or you won’t understand the method in my madness, so to speak — the issue of response was not simply of survival but of growth. The whole point of challenge was not simply that difficulties were to be overcome, or nullified, but to be experienced in such a way that the encounter with adversity actually fostered further growth, a higher development of the soul, increased maturity, and so on.

That’s the way the immunological system operates. It learns from its battles. You seem to be suggesting an internal focus rather than an external one.

Correct. Everything that’s true about immunology is true about self. That’s the great hidden message in creation. I’ll say more about that later. For the moment just try to understand that if what the Holy One wanted in his creatures was a constantly evolving state of maturity — which, since the Garden, the Creator has viewed in terms of the capacity to take responsibility for one’s own being and destiny — then it was clear to me that anything I could do to entice creatures away from that perspective would be successful in retarding the evolution of the soul.

A quick example here would help.

Well, a quick one would be making involvement in some cause an excuse for personal awareness.

I see.

But I don’t want to get all bogged down in method; that’s precisely what I’m always seducing others into doing. My game is much bigger than that. I have always known that one of the best ways to hinder evolution was to create societies of intimidation because that gets everyone to herd; it creates undifferentiated globbiness; it induces a big push for togetherness and community all right, but it’s more a stuck-togetherness, a togetherness that nurtures the kinds of communities that inhibit self-realization.

Yet you have the reputation of being against community and behind all acts of selfishness, egotism, narcissism, and pride.

One of my best tricks. Getting humanity to create communities is precisely what I want. It’s the kind of communities I want them to create that is the important issue. You see, it’s really quite easy to get flesh and blood to come together; all protoplasm loves to join. The problem for humanity is not getting close, it’s preserving self, by which I mean integrity, in a close relationship. That’s the basic issue. For years I used to bring about undifferentiated communities by fostering totalitarian regimes; there was always an infinite supply of self-aggrandizing organisms around to inspire to become false saviors. But it got too bloody. In recent years, however, I have come to realize that that approach is very inefficient and that you don’t need totalitarian governments to create monolithic societies.

What works better?

Raising society’s level of anxiety and encouraging PC.

Do you mean political correctness or pastoral counseling?

Sometimes they’re hard to distinguish.

But can’t anxiety be challenging?

I’m not talking about that kind of anxiety — the kind that is connected with a goal. I’m talking about chronic anxiety, the kind that is nonspecific; the kind that just grips everyone like an overall atmosphere. The kind that increases automatic reactivity of everyone to everyone; the kind that increases blaming rather than owning; the kind that creates surges of quick-fix attitudes; the kind that gets everyone to herd. The kind that inhibits the expression or development of well-defined leadership. But raising society’s level of anxiety only sets the scene, and here you will see the essence of my genius — the more anxious I can make society, the easier it becomes for me to tempt creatures into violating the nature of their being, and that’s when I’ve really got them.

I’m still not getting it.

Look at it this way. If you read the accounts of creation carefully, you will see that the Creator established three principles to separate a god from a human. It doesn’t matter what kind of human, black or white, Jewish or Christian, male or female. The three criteria have to do with knowledge, power, and death. Whereas gods can be omniscient, omnipotent, or immortal, human beings cannot be all-knowing, all-powerful, or live eternally. Whenever they disregard, no less try to violate, those basic parameters of existence, they lose their way.

So you’re saying that almost all barriers to community result from trying to will what can’t be willed.

In a way, but let me get to the overarching theme here. It is when human beings become most anxious that they are most liable to forget what makes them human, and then they’re really in my power.

If I get your drift, what you are saying is that you do not want human beings to acknowledge or perhaps even face their frailty. You want them to think that as long as they have enough power or enough knowledge or enough time, they could solve anything.

Precisely. All my temptations work best when humans keep trying to solve what they cannot solve, rather than growing from the acceptance of their limitations.

Satan, sometimes you sound like a preacher.

Darth Vader was once a Jedi Knight.