"How to Land Your Kid in Therapy" Lori Gottlieb

Psychotherapists Lori Gottlieb wrote an article titled “How to Land Your Kid in Therapy”.  In this article Gottlieb talks about the normal therapy season.  A person who has problems with their parents and the therapist must “re-parent” them.  However, the main focus of the article is not on troubled childhoods rather perfect childhoods.  Gottlieb describes one patent as having “strong friendships, a close family, and a deep sense of emptiness. She had come in, she told me, because she was “just not happy.” And what was so upsetting, she continued, was that she felt she had nothing to be unhappy about. She reported that she had “awesome” parents, two fabulous siblings, supportive friends, an excellent education, a cool job, good health, and a nice apartment. She had no family history of depression or anxiety” something was not right.  She talks more about how these patients had parents who would always step in and correct any problem their kid was having.  Gottlieb contemplates this and comes to a conclusion that these parents have done too much. 

Plainly the point Gottlieb is trying to get across is that parents who do too much are counterproductive to their kids’ wellbeing.  I do not agree with the article that parents can be too attuned or that they try and be too much of a friend to their children.  That is absurd; those things are just the basis for any human relationship.  Nonetheless as a college student my parents are still very much a part of my life, thus I can closely relate to this article.  I am not saying that my life is perfect like these patients.  However, as it seems many parents of my generation, my own included tell their kids we can do anything.  My parents give a lot of positive feedback and are always willing to listen. For me it sets the bar extremely high and failure is not an option.  However, I ask my-self where is this bar that I am expected to reach?  Loose fitting criteria can be bundled in with it like happiness, I have to love my job, and be overall successful.  The point I am making is that it leaves a lot of room where hundreds of things fall under; all of which I am told are attainable by me.   

Along with this it is important to understand a change in society.  Telling every kid they are a winner even when they are not.  Or that one’s best is always good enough.  I say this because it is not true; for me I find now and when I was younger it just blends success and failure into a gray haze.  Thus when people grow up and get a job and are where they think they should be in life it leaves them uncertain.  They know their parents will be behind them 100% of the way on anything they do, even if it is wrong they are still a winner.  So at the end of the day are these people winners?

I played football in high school as a free safety.  I was playing in a game and my team was up by three.  We were on defense and there was enough time for one more play.  As they snapped the ball I watched my receiver take off as i opened up my hips to run with him.  The quarterback hurled the ball up to the end zone.  Both of us jumped up for the ball I reached through his arms tipped the ball back up as we both fell; somehow on his way down to the ground he fumbled it around a little and pulled it in.  My team lost the game on that play that one catch that I let in.  After the game my mom said that it was a good game and I played well.  This obviously was not true and has a way of merging success and failure. 

Gottlieb has a good point and I agree with her that too much parenting can be bad for a kid.  More importantly it is a lack of structure and uncertainty of success that causes a kid to end up in therapy.  With pressure from parents it can be very hard to pick a direction one wants to take their life.  On top of that to work a lifetime towards one thing, and there is no certainty when or if success has been obtained.  This can leave anyone feeling a sense of emptiness and unhappiness.  There is great benefit in failure however, one needs to be able to recognize it and work at it in order to benefit from it.  Not be protected from it that’s what many parents fail to see.

David Foster Wallace's "Kenyon Commencement Speech"

          David Foster Wallace's "Kenyon Commencement Speech” is one that is rather far from the normal.  Wallace opens up his speech with a story saying “There are these two young fish swimming along and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says “Morning, boys. How’s the water?” And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes “What the hell is water?””.  This story coincides with the theme of his speech which he keeps referring to as the human “default setting”.  He talks about growing up and getting a job and how it is no fun.  So people tend to revert back to their default setting, where everything is about you, other people are slowing you down, in your way and you immediately get upset or flustered.  Wallace points out an obvious point that we only know life from our own view and that all information we perceive is through are interpretation.  So this default setting is hard to avoid however if you think about it you can change it.  By putting yourself in others shoes you can imagine what they may be going though that makes them act the way they do.  He talks about not letting your mind be the master of yourself as a whole.  Wallace sums it up nicely saying “That is real freedom. That is being educated, and understanding how to think. The alternative is unconsciousness, the default setting, the rat race, the constant gnawing sense of having had, and lost, some infinite thing.”  The infinite thing he is talking about is something, some being or someone that we worship and we will never be fulfilled with the amount we have.  Wallace concludes his speech by going back to the fish story and saying “this is water this is water” we all need to keep reminding ourselves to stay conscious and alive through the real world. 

In today’s culture no matter what someone does or archives it seems as though they are told they are a winner.  Obviously this is not true and I like that Wallace avoids that mentality and talks about awareness of everything around the person instead.  He talks about the default setting of a person to be like a rat race where everyone is concerned only with themselves and getting what they desire.  I find this very true for my life even know Wallace is talking of the employed life outside of collage.  I have just arrived at college and already three weeks in I can notice that I start to enter my “default setting.”  My main concern is my grades and absorbing all the knowledge I possibly can.  Thus I find that I am not as outgoing to meet new people or even have time to talk with other people.  That being said my grades will never be good enough at so the race continues.   To be able to be the master of your mind and use it as a tool is incredibly hard.   It requires being educated and understanding how to think.  Distancing oneself from the default setting and achieving what Wallace calls true freedom is something I cannot yet achieve.

 The main themes that run throughout the speech are very true.  However, he supplements his point of the mind being a terrible master saying this “It is not the least bit coincidental that adults who commit suicide with firearms almost always shoot themselves in: the head. They shoot the terrible master.”  Connecting these two points is a big stretch that I think cannot be made.  People shoot themselves in the head because it is the quickest way to kill them with a firearm.  Nerveless, Wallace has very strong themes that run through his speech that I can relate to and find true.  Wallace’s aspect on the truth about life is just another way to look at things and should be at least considered. 

"Old Faithful" By David Sedaris

David Sedaris's "Old Faithful" is a narrative of his love life with a man named Hugh. Sedaris depicts an extremely painful boil he has on his tailbone.  He goes on to separate himself from what the normal or his friends do with respect to relationships.  Saying “Almost all of the gay couples I knew at that time had some sort of an arrangement. Boyfriend A could sleep with someone else as long as he didn’t bring him home—or as long as he did bring him home. And boyfriend B was free to do the same. It was a good setup for those who enjoyed variety and the thrill of the hunt, but to me it was just scary, and way too much work—like having one job while applying for another.” (Sedaris 2) it is clear Sedaris has a fear of being alone.  He then goes on to tell us about this guy Hugh, he meets and falls in love with.  Things are well, except he has a fear that if they go out in public they will not have anything to talk about.  He even goes so far is to do research and write notes so they have an outline to keep conversation going.  He recalls seeing an old couple sitting in a restaurant and the elderly gentlemen looks up at him; he could see in his eyes that one day this will be you.  The story is concluded by Hugh lancing the boil on his tailbone, Sedaris then compares them to an old couple rather than trying to distance them like he had in the past.

The main theme through the story was Sedaris’ fears about love.  He talks about a bad relationship and how it will be very hard to find someone new.  How he is very monogamous and it seems he is one of the only ones who is.  Even after he falls in love with Hugh he fears they will not have anything to talk about.  This is very relatable because love is unsure, and in today’s world much of life is very clear thus the unknown is frightening.