a poor choice of words

Yesterday's post -- actually, the wonderful, intelligent and thoughtful comments on yesterday's post -- have been working on me all night.  And I've come up with something important to me that I'd like to share here -- but first I need to give some context:

One of the things I've always loved about AA and the AA literature is how even-handed and open minded it is.  A favorite quote of mine in the book "Alcoholics Anonymous" (AA's Big Book), which exemplifies this tone, is found on the first page (pg. 44) of Chapter 4, "We Agnostics":

"If, when you honestly want to, you find you cannot quit entirely, or if when drinking you have little control over the amount you take, you are probably alcoholic."

No absolutes.  No finger shaking.  Plenty of room for consideration before agreeing with what is proposed.  That spirit of offering information without sounding a dogmatic bell is all over the Big Book.  There is certainly the occasional strongly worded suggestion, or -- given that we are talking a life-and-death struggle --  a sometimes grave and important warning, but the overall spirit of the Big Book is one of offering suggestions based on experience, without brow beating anyone while doing so.

How the Big Book became so balanced is fairly common knowledge.  Many people feel the writing is Divinely Inspired -- given how prophetic it has turned out to be, and how useful to so many people, I think you can make a lovely case for that -- but the fact is, the book was constructed as much as written, through the input of the first one hundred (roughly) sober alcoholics who started what we think of today as Alcoholics Anonymous.  Well aware that if they depended solely on word-of-mouth to pass along what they had discovered the message would likely become distorted, they set out to put their Steps and experience on paper.  And almost all the AA histories agree, that original group was divided 50/50 between the faithful (predominantly Christian) and agnostics.  Bill Wilson, one of AA's co-founders, was the man at the typewriter, but everyone reviewed and commented on the manuscript as it developed.  And this (mostly) friendly friction between the devout and the doubtful resulted in the balanced, open-minded wording throughout AA's primary text as we have it today.

13 years later, Bill Wilson himself set down to write the book "Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions."  If I have my history right, this was done in part to help AA as a whole embrace the Traditions, which came into being some time after AA got started.  But it was also a wonderful opportunity to flesh out some of the ideas in the Big Book.  I have often observed that, to me, the Big Book is like a road map, giving you clear cut directions on how to get from a broken, drunken life to a clean and sober one, while the 12&12 is like the travelog, warning you against bumps in the road, dangerous curves, and pointing out sights of interest along the way.

But it was written by one man, Bill himself.

I love the 12&12.  I've written extensively here about how, for example, in the Big Book the words "dry" and "sober" are used pretty much interchangeably, switched around more in an effort to improve the quality of the writing than with any real distinction that they might mean somewhat different things.  This concept came a bit later, and is discussed in much helpful detail by Bill in the 12&12.

And yet we have this, the subject of the post from yesterday:

"It is a spiritual axiom that every time we are disturbed,
no matter what the cause, there is something wrong with
us. If somebody hurts us and we are sore, we are in the
wrong also."

In my zeal to understand for myself what this means, and to offer some helpful insight to someone asking, I took a swing at making sense of it.  And what I wrote yesterday still works for me pretty well for me today.

And yet...

If I am to be completely honest, when I look at my thinking I can see how I was subjugating some of my common sense to find a way to embrace that statement -- I was laboring to make it work.

And nowhere in the Big Book, or in any meeting I've attended -- even though there is much talk of being completely willing, of surrender, etc.... does AA ask me to abandon my common sense.

(And to those who are not fans of AA, eager to pounce with an "Oh yeah?" and then site some terrible experience they had in the East Bumpluck group of Alcoholics Anonymous, I can only say that I am sorry you had a bad experience, that has not been what I have found in AA, and that AA never asks me to do anything I am not willing to do -- and the whole point of what I've written above about the Big Book is that while it may make strongly worded suggestions, it is not didactic in the least.  It does not require I give up my common sense, it only asks me to consider things differently.)

Thus, after reading the comments from yesterday, I have decided, for me, that while I love the 12&12, I think Bill made a poor choice of words when he chose such strong language, so full of absolutes, in expressing this particular idea.

The way the idea is presented (which is not the same as the idea itself, of course) is a bit of a sour note against the harmony of how open-minded and even handed so much of the rest of AA's literature is.

I don't need AA, or Bill Wilson, or me or you to be perfect.  My faith in the 12 Steps, and how effective they are as a way to stay sober, is completely unshaken by this new opinion -- this idea I've come to (again, for me) that in this little bit of writing Bill perhaps chose his words poorly.  God knows, after writing this blog five days a week for more than two years (seven days a week for the first few months, but that nearly broke me) I have an intimate understanding of how one can be making a point, feel strongly about it, but then the words on the page, cut free from verbal tone or facial expression, strike a tone more sharply than one may intend.

I don't know that about Bill's opinion of the 12&12 -- for all I know this was his very favorite few lines.  It's possible Lois got sick to death of him going on and on about how much he loved his little couplet of the spiritual axiom and how we are in the wrong, also -- though to harp upon it would have been a deadly error in the game of marriage dynamics chess, I wager, once Lois got Al-Anon up and running and learned how to detach with love, draw better boundaries and not take any more crap.  I fantasize sometimes about a little scene in their living room, after Lois got some recovery of her own:

Bill:  Lois, I'd like some coffee.

Lois:  You would?

Bill:  Yes.

Lois:  Alright dear.  The coffee's in the kitchen, if you make a pot bring me a cup too, would you?

Bill sits, jaw agape, for several moments, before closing it and heading into the kitchen.

Go Lo!

AA works.  The Big Book -- and the 12&12 -- are full of wonderful, life-saving information which continues to speak to me more than 20 years after I started reading it.

But for me, those couple of sentences in the 12&12 in Step 10 are not Bill's best work.

 

Comments

[Dave]

I want some coffee too.

[sevenup]

Thanks for writing on it again. I read it yesterday and I was unsure about it. I don't own a 12 & 12, actually just got my first Big Book a few weeks ago, so I obviously hadn't come across that part. When I did my first 4th with my sponsor (in NA) I had written about having been raped at 17. Apparently I was supposed to find "my part" in that, and all I could come up with was that I was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Even THAT is not my part, as we should all be free to go where we like. I agree that this is poorly worded.

I must say, as someone fairly new to AA literature, that I think most of it is excellent. I do have a friend gleefully waiting for me to get to the part "for wives" though. I might not ever go there. ;)

[David S]

Yesterday I shared your musings with some sponsees; today I will be asked about your change of tone. What I will share with them, is what Bill W. used to always say when someone disagreed.
"That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it"
And here is my opinion. That your ego got in the way of the process and allowed you to take a heavy handed public swipe. You made it perfectly clear that you did not agree in your first writing, coming back for "clarification" seems ego driven to me. Thank you for being out there, I read you daily, and will continue to.
David S.

[Virginia]

"My part" has always been that my go to place is building and embellishing any resentment large or small. Before working the steps and reading the 12 Step Literature I felt "entitled" to do that. Now I understand, not ruminating and engaging in a situation, experience or my history in that way, I am not nearly as "sore" and much less inclined to "feeling" thoughts that do not help me approach a happy, joyous and free life. This is how I have used my understanding of that axiom. Thanks to MSP and all for this interesting discussion.

[Elizabeth]

Well, I have found that particular bit of writing challenging over the years. There are, in my life, any number of situations from childhood to present day that clearly I did not create (at least as a small child). Just as I was writing this I thought how my life choices once I was making choices on my own at some point in my early years did create environments for many awful things to occur and the awful things did occur. The spiritual axiom addressed in your post is a difficult one to swallow. I have grappled with it many, many times. Yet, sitting at my laptop tonight, I cannot think of one thing that has happened in my adult life that did not have the mark of one of my poor choices stamped on it. Oh, it might be years later and far removed from the initial choice but a choice did at some point expose me to people, places and things that did hurt me and people I loved a great deal. So I think this axiom is meant for an adult audience and not applicable before the age of reason whatever that age may be. In my life the hard and immutable truths of the wreckage of self-will run riot echoed from old-timers and in meetings where truth abounded hurt me deeply and saved my life. Give me even one tiny drop of an opportunity to point a finger and I am off to the races. Finally!! I was a pure victim with no fault. WRONG! I was a battered wife, pregnant before I got married TWICE, married multiple times to increasingly irresponsible men. My precious children had to deal with an ego maniace with an inferiority complex and the nutcases I brought into their lives. So, o.k., maybe someone yells at me when I did not do one single solitary thing other than be in the right place at the right time. Maybe I have been innocent a time or two but, for this alcoholic, it is best I do not have that pointed out to me. Compassion? Yes! Self-righteouos indignation because I been done wrong?? You might as well put a drink in my hand. I cannot afford to be right when being right means I get to see how you hurt me and I didn't deserve it. OMG!! Sorry but I hated this axiom for a long, long time. I still think it is hard and uncompromising. So was my drinking and drugging folks. I'd rather cry uncle every now and then when I was right than be right and be drunk.

[xty]

When I read statements like that or hear them applied without exception or qualification,I find irony at the lack of open-mindedness I have largely encountered in the program. The concept of disturbance arising from oneself is very useful and often correct. It is also extremely dangerous, particularly to women, minorities, and others who may have a background of poor self esteem, abuse, or exclusion.
Anger is an alarm system - it can be abused, misplaced, wrong, and unhealthy, sure. But I also know it can alert me to situations in my life that I need to do something about. That something may have nothing to do with changing how I think about something. It may help me out of an unhealthy situation or damaging relationship.

[anon]

Its nice to see the Sponsorpants process at work, and brave of you to put yourself out there, imperfectly. I really relate to that. Thank you.
Early on I was like "well what if someone sets my house on fire?" Now I feel that instead of getting stuck in blaming/reacting--I can get the F out!

[occhris]

When someone does something that causes an emotional reaction in me, (ie. causes me to be "sore"), it is an invitation to turn inward and examine what is going on for me. You're right, Bill's choice of words was poor, because saying something is wrong with us invokes judgement, that I am bad in some way and must fix myself. My sponsor says that a big part of recovery is awareness, and therefore, my "sore-ness" is a blessing, an opportunity to get to know myself better and to hopefully clear the way to a more conscious contact with my higher power.