For all you obsessives out there!
Big Book concordance (3rd
edn)
{Seriously …... it is
sometimes handy to have an index to hand!)
Cheerio
The Fellas (Friends of
Alcoholics Anonymous)
Showing posts with label Big Book. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Big Book. Show all posts
Friday, 12 October 2012
Sunday, 30 October 2011
Which Big Book? AA's or the cult's?
A
Comparison of Step 3 from David C Icons so-called”big book
recovery“ website
with the
book Alcoholics Anonymous
- David C Icons/Jim W’s websiteBig Book of Alcoholics AnonymousThis is a decision to go on with the program and the practical consequences are that we decide to do the other steps and try to behave in accordance with the spiritual principles of honesty, unselfishness, love and purity, (the 4 Absolutes of the Oxford Group cult) and that we will follow the guidance of our sponsors.Not in the Big Book. No mention of having to follow the 4 Absolutes or having to follow the guidance of a sponsor, or any other person.N. B. Remember the words of the Big Book itself. “To show other alcoholics precisely how we have recovered is the main purpose of this book.” (AA; page xiv - foreward to the 1st Edition.) In other words - if something isn’t precisely there in the book, it wasn’t meant to be there.If we have followed all the suggestions given in the before, and are ready to follow all that our sponsor suggests further, then we can answer this question with a firm, ‘Yes’. (As we said before, for most of us, we learn to trust our Higher Power by first placing our trust in our sponsor.)Not in the Big Book. No mention of having to follow a list of Daily Suggestions, or any other daily quota of tasks, prior to taking step 3. Again no mention of having to follow what a sponsor suggests or what anyone else suggests. No mention of having to “trust” any human being or human power, sponsor or otherwise.And then we read out the prayer, while on our knees.Not in the Big Book. No mention of any specific body posture required to say/read 3rd step prayer, or indeed any other prayer found in the book.This step was better done with a sponsorMisrepresentation of the Big Book. Taking Step 3 with someone other than a sponsor is not mentioned as an option in the website.Misrepresentation of the Big Book. Taking Step 3 alone is not mentioned as an option in the website. It must be done with a sponsorNot in the Big Book. The actual text says “We found it very desirable to take this spiritual step with an understanding person, such as our wife, best friend, or spiritual advise. But it is better to meet God alone than with one who might misunderstand…” (page 63) (for example, a sponsor may not understand my conception of a God who does not require kneeling, or other matters pertaining to personal faith, custom and culture.)We do not retake Step Three as we go through the programmerNot in the Big Book There is no clear instruction in the Big Book that we cannot retake Step 3 if we desire to do so.Omission of the fact that the Big Book says that many used the prayer, thus implying that there were those who did not, yet were still included in the fellowship (Many of us, but not all of us).Omission of the option of using another prayer, or different wording, is not allowed in the website. Again misrepresenting the actual Big Book text, which allows for individuals to follow their own conscience.Many of us said to our Maker, as we understood Him… (page 63)The wording was, of course, quite optional so long as we expressed the idea.. (page 63)
(our
thanks to this contributor for their analysis)
Cheers
The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)
Wednesday, 27 July 2011
Now this is what we call a REAL AA convention!
Bournemouth AA convention Saturday 6th August 2011. For details see below:
Now compare and contrast the above with your average cult promotion!
Note: the complete absence of: frills, advertising of “circuit speakers” (from the US or anywhere else for that matter), gimmicks, “come ons”, promises of “instant ecstasy” (fourth dimensional or otherwise!), sponsorship (temporary or otherwise) and the fact that admission is actually FREE ie. this event is self supporting through the voluntary contributions of its members in accordance with Tradition 7.
Now compare and contrast the above with your average cult promotion!
Quote: "Frothy emotional appeal seldom suffices. The message which can interest and hold these alcoholic people must have depth and weight. In nearly all cases, their ideals must be grounded in a power greater than themselves, if they are to re-create their lives."
The Doctor's Opinion:
The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)
(our usual thanks to the contributor of this information)
Wednesday, 29 June 2011
Big Book fetishism
Every now and then we get an email from a so-called “hard core” Big Book fan. It's usually someone from the Primary Purpose gang (which makes claim to being conversant with this tome) although there are rumours going around that one of the Visions mob (and we mean mob!) actually read almost a whole sentence from the book last year! But you know what it's like in AA – there are rumours and then there are …. more rumours! …...
….....It might be useful to indicate here that although we lump them all together there are some differences between these two extremist/fundamentalist camps (although the similarities are much greater and getting worse all the time!). The Primary Purpose 'axis' (derived from the US) is not quite as obsessive as the Visions (our very own home grown freaks!) when it comes to sponsorship (ie. “do exactly what your sponsor tells you” etc) but they do glory in 'fast-tracking' newcomers through the programme (regardless of their aptitude, state of mind, physical well-being and other quite minor details). Both lay claim to the authentic programme of AA (usually by indulging in a 'revisionist' analysis of AA back in the pre-tradition era) and glorying in the days when only “real” alcoholics were allowed into meetings (after they had been properly screened and authenticated by the appropriate authorities ….. self-appointed of course!) In those halcyon times you had none of your treatment centre riff-raff or troublesome “addicts”, or even those annoying “depressives” and such like cluttering up the fellowship. Even the agnostics and atheists did as they were told and got down on their knees and prayed like they believed! No sirree! Only pure blood, 'real deal' alkies were admitted into our select society! Ah good times indeed …. when men were men and women were women and sheep roamed the green pastures quite unafraid! But now – well it's anarchy! They'll let ANYBODY in! No vetting, no bleeding deacon to cast his/her expert eye over the new prospect. Nope! Anyone and his brother can just wander into a meeting (maybe there's nothing on TV), plonk their backsides on a seat, drink a cup of tea, nibble on a biscuit (well at one of those fancy meetings at least!) and waffle on about their precious washing machine breaking down – but then they didn't pick up a drink! Who'd have thought it? Our exclusive fellowship being taken over by these ne'er do wells! Well something should be done! This cannot be allowed to go on........someone should ring up …..... York! (frothing at the mouth and eyes bulging wildly.....)........
Wow! That was SOME digression... anyway.... to get back to our main theme. So every now and then we get an EXPERT mailing us and putting us straight on some points of OUR PROGRAMME. Seems we got it all wrong! Well of course we got it wrong. But then everyone has the RIGHT to be WRONG haven't they? Or maybe that only works if you're a cult group? So we goes and extricates our copy of the aforementioned work (it is of course mostly employed in its traditional capacity – as a door STOP), dusts it off and pulls open the musty and mildewed cover. Turning to the apposite sections we duly send our response back to the EXPERT. Oh dear oh dear! Now we're told we've got it all out of CONTEXT!! (even if we quote an entire page and then the relevant chapter). Nope it seems that we've still got it wrong... So we turns again to another section and quote that (and including context this time because now we've learnt our lesson good and proper!). Nope that still doesn't do the trick. It turns out that we're TWISTING the words to suit our own agenda!! Well who would have thought it?? How could that EVER happen? But now our EXPERT is getting very hot under the collar and resorts at last to profanity! We refer immediately to our very own - almost disintegrating - volume and look for the part of the AA message which includes the use of foul language. Nope! Can't find anything there. Maybe it's in the Just for Today card.. “Talk low”...mmmm! So we hold a conscience meeting to debate this vexing question: Is swearing QUIETLY OK then?? Well who can say!
Talking of profanity whatever happened to Wayne's latest address to the R2R (cult group) Plymouth brethren? Not a bleep out of him for almost NINE months and then an audio file appears out of the ether only to disappear almost immediately. Mind you we did give it a bit of a mauling! Still one shouldn't be afraid of unfavourable reviews? It's all part of the 'growing in sobriety' process – ain't it? Anyhoo … that's about it on the Big Book (and Wayne of course). For our part we quite like the text because if the cult (Primary Purpose/Back to Basics/Visions etc) ever managed to read (and inwardly digest!) a copy it would very rapidly put paid to their own brand of dogma. But then we think that's pretty unlikely … don't you?
Cheerio
The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)
PS Oh yeah! What IS going on in WESSEX? And where is it anyway?
….....It might be useful to indicate here that although we lump them all together there are some differences between these two extremist/fundamentalist camps (although the similarities are much greater and getting worse all the time!). The Primary Purpose 'axis' (derived from the US) is not quite as obsessive as the Visions (our very own home grown freaks!) when it comes to sponsorship (ie. “do exactly what your sponsor tells you” etc) but they do glory in 'fast-tracking' newcomers through the programme (regardless of their aptitude, state of mind, physical well-being and other quite minor details). Both lay claim to the authentic programme of AA (usually by indulging in a 'revisionist' analysis of AA back in the pre-tradition era) and glorying in the days when only “real” alcoholics were allowed into meetings (after they had been properly screened and authenticated by the appropriate authorities ….. self-appointed of course!) In those halcyon times you had none of your treatment centre riff-raff or troublesome “addicts”, or even those annoying “depressives” and such like cluttering up the fellowship. Even the agnostics and atheists did as they were told and got down on their knees and prayed like they believed! No sirree! Only pure blood, 'real deal' alkies were admitted into our select society! Ah good times indeed …. when men were men and women were women and sheep roamed the green pastures quite unafraid! But now – well it's anarchy! They'll let ANYBODY in! No vetting, no bleeding deacon to cast his/her expert eye over the new prospect. Nope! Anyone and his brother can just wander into a meeting (maybe there's nothing on TV), plonk their backsides on a seat, drink a cup of tea, nibble on a biscuit (well at one of those fancy meetings at least!) and waffle on about their precious washing machine breaking down – but then they didn't pick up a drink! Who'd have thought it? Our exclusive fellowship being taken over by these ne'er do wells! Well something should be done! This cannot be allowed to go on........someone should ring up …..... York! (frothing at the mouth and eyes bulging wildly.....)........
Wow! That was SOME digression... anyway.... to get back to our main theme. So every now and then we get an EXPERT mailing us and putting us straight on some points of OUR PROGRAMME. Seems we got it all wrong! Well of course we got it wrong. But then everyone has the RIGHT to be WRONG haven't they? Or maybe that only works if you're a cult group? So we goes and extricates our copy of the aforementioned work (it is of course mostly employed in its traditional capacity – as a door STOP), dusts it off and pulls open the musty and mildewed cover. Turning to the apposite sections we duly send our response back to the EXPERT. Oh dear oh dear! Now we're told we've got it all out of CONTEXT!! (even if we quote an entire page and then the relevant chapter). Nope it seems that we've still got it wrong... So we turns again to another section and quote that (and including context this time because now we've learnt our lesson good and proper!). Nope that still doesn't do the trick. It turns out that we're TWISTING the words to suit our own agenda!! Well who would have thought it?? How could that EVER happen? But now our EXPERT is getting very hot under the collar and resorts at last to profanity! We refer immediately to our very own - almost disintegrating - volume and look for the part of the AA message which includes the use of foul language. Nope! Can't find anything there. Maybe it's in the Just for Today card.. “Talk low”...mmmm! So we hold a conscience meeting to debate this vexing question: Is swearing QUIETLY OK then?? Well who can say!
Talking of profanity whatever happened to Wayne's latest address to the R2R (cult group) Plymouth brethren? Not a bleep out of him for almost NINE months and then an audio file appears out of the ether only to disappear almost immediately. Mind you we did give it a bit of a mauling! Still one shouldn't be afraid of unfavourable reviews? It's all part of the 'growing in sobriety' process – ain't it? Anyhoo … that's about it on the Big Book (and Wayne of course). For our part we quite like the text because if the cult (Primary Purpose/Back to Basics/Visions etc) ever managed to read (and inwardly digest!) a copy it would very rapidly put paid to their own brand of dogma. But then we think that's pretty unlikely … don't you?
Cheerio
The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)
PS Oh yeah! What IS going on in WESSEX? And where is it anyway?
Sunday, 21 November 2010
AA founders debated approach in the original manuscript
(by Lindsay Barba, Associate Editor, Addiction Professional)
"Long before word processors gave us the luxury of tracking our text edits for the next reader, Bill Wilson, founder of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), passed around 400 physical copies of his recovery doctrine for revisions and suggestions. Afterward, he and a few of his colleagues copied the most significant of those contributions onto one manuscript, which would eventually become AA's Big Book -- a text used faithfully by addiction professionals and those in recovery since its first publication in April 1939.
The Big Book went on to sell over 20 million copies worldwide, but the original manuscript and its many contributions remained hidden from public view. It was stored in Bill and Lois Wilson's home until 1978, when Lois passed the manuscript on to friend Barry Leach, who maintained its privacy for 30 more years.
The manuscript eventually went up for auction in 2007 and was secured by Ken Roberts for $850,000. Roberts then presented the manuscript to Hazelden, who will release the book in two editions, one cloth and one leather-bound, this October.
"It's arguably one of the most important books of the 20th century as it relates to addiction and recovery," says Nick Motu, senior vice president of Hazelden and publisher at Hazelden Publishing. "To those that use the Big Book and the 12 Step process as core to their profession, it would be very interesting for them to understand what went into the conceptual beginnings of the 12 Step model of treatment."
The manuscript shows text revisions and comments inked in a variety of colors, indicating the work of four to eight core contributors that Hazelden will identify in its release this fall. "Readers … will see the rejected suggestions, inserts, crossed-out comments, and then last minute changes," Motu says.
Along with the original manuscript, Hazelden's editions will include:
Comments from leading archivists in the margins;
Two essays by Big Book and AA historians;
Annotated notes on the text;
A publication timeline; and
A 1954 speech by Bill Wilson on the making of the Big Book.
Debate over spirituality uncovered
Though it's no secret to the addiction profession, much debate arose over how AA would present its principles, which relied heavily on religion.
"Of special interest in the manuscript will be the debates that occurred … over the role of religion and spirituality in AA," says Motu. "Bill Wilson really was adamant about making AA spiritual rather than religious, and you will see that not only in the comments of those that were accepted but also of those that were rejected."
For example, on the opening page of Chapter 5, one contributor noted that ideas in the text "should be studied from the mold angle." Fred Holmquist, historian and director of Hazelden's The Lodge Program, attributes this commentary to the fellowship's fear of triggering newcomers' religious prejudices.
"It talks about their understanding that religions sometimes pour people into a mold, and it's a little bit one-size-fits-all," he says. "Typically, alcoholics had not found relief from alcoholism in their religions, yet some had, but the idea was that they did not want to arouse religious prejudice that already existed in people."
Click here for larger image
Similarly, another contributor makes a note of "His Divine Consideration" across the bottom of the page near Step 9, which states, "Made direct amends to people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others." To Holmquist, this reference is still obscure, but he has some speculations.
"If it's referencing Step 9, then the idea of doing what you need to do unless it will injure them or others would be a matter of Divine Consideration," he says. "They were avoiding the density of religious-sounding language, and that would be an example of somebody maybe noting what spiritual or religious principle it represented, simultaneously written in pragmatic language."
From "prescribing" to "describing" a program of recovery
Widespread changes in the manuscript signal AA's decision to avoid prescriptive language -- such as "you should do this" -- in favor of descriptive language -- such as "we did this." Holmquist says this typifies AA's strategy of addressing the newcomer with gentleness and accessibility while maintaining respect for the medical community.
"They were respecting the attitude of the newcomer as perhaps being defensive or quick to run," he says. "Also, to other professionals, it was clear they took out specific references that could make the authors sound like they were prescribing medical or psychiatric or psychological recommendations."
Holmquist attributes the original use of a prescriptive voice as the result of the founding members' sincerity and seriousness about their program of recovery. "Their heart was right, but they realized in looking at it that it would probably be overwhelming for a newcomer to look at and think, ‘I have to do all of this stuff,'" he says. "So they just reverted to sharing what they did, which is what I think is at the heart of attraction not promotion."
Click here for larger image
This is evident in the paragraph following the final step on page 31, where the original text read: "You may exclaim, what an order! I can't go through with it!" The contributors changed this to, "Many of us exclaimed," which allows the newcomer to share in the original AA fellowship's own experience of feeling overwhelmed by the program's requirements.
"These people realized it was far more pragmatic to … settle for doing a little bit better each day," Holmquist says. "That's why the idea of this being both a program of action and a fellowship is so important, because you get so much from the combination of both versus just one.""
"Long before word processors gave us the luxury of tracking our text edits for the next reader, Bill Wilson, founder of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), passed around 400 physical copies of his recovery doctrine for revisions and suggestions. Afterward, he and a few of his colleagues copied the most significant of those contributions onto one manuscript, which would eventually become AA's Big Book -- a text used faithfully by addiction professionals and those in recovery since its first publication in April 1939.
The Big Book went on to sell over 20 million copies worldwide, but the original manuscript and its many contributions remained hidden from public view. It was stored in Bill and Lois Wilson's home until 1978, when Lois passed the manuscript on to friend Barry Leach, who maintained its privacy for 30 more years.
The manuscript eventually went up for auction in 2007 and was secured by Ken Roberts for $850,000. Roberts then presented the manuscript to Hazelden, who will release the book in two editions, one cloth and one leather-bound, this October.
"It's arguably one of the most important books of the 20th century as it relates to addiction and recovery," says Nick Motu, senior vice president of Hazelden and publisher at Hazelden Publishing. "To those that use the Big Book and the 12 Step process as core to their profession, it would be very interesting for them to understand what went into the conceptual beginnings of the 12 Step model of treatment."
The manuscript shows text revisions and comments inked in a variety of colors, indicating the work of four to eight core contributors that Hazelden will identify in its release this fall. "Readers … will see the rejected suggestions, inserts, crossed-out comments, and then last minute changes," Motu says.
Along with the original manuscript, Hazelden's editions will include:
Comments from leading archivists in the margins;
Two essays by Big Book and AA historians;
Annotated notes on the text;
A publication timeline; and
A 1954 speech by Bill Wilson on the making of the Big Book.
Debate over spirituality uncovered
Though it's no secret to the addiction profession, much debate arose over how AA would present its principles, which relied heavily on religion.
"Of special interest in the manuscript will be the debates that occurred … over the role of religion and spirituality in AA," says Motu. "Bill Wilson really was adamant about making AA spiritual rather than religious, and you will see that not only in the comments of those that were accepted but also of those that were rejected."
For example, on the opening page of Chapter 5, one contributor noted that ideas in the text "should be studied from the mold angle." Fred Holmquist, historian and director of Hazelden's The Lodge Program, attributes this commentary to the fellowship's fear of triggering newcomers' religious prejudices.
"It talks about their understanding that religions sometimes pour people into a mold, and it's a little bit one-size-fits-all," he says. "Typically, alcoholics had not found relief from alcoholism in their religions, yet some had, but the idea was that they did not want to arouse religious prejudice that already existed in people."
Click here for larger image
Similarly, another contributor makes a note of "His Divine Consideration" across the bottom of the page near Step 9, which states, "Made direct amends to people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others." To Holmquist, this reference is still obscure, but he has some speculations.
"If it's referencing Step 9, then the idea of doing what you need to do unless it will injure them or others would be a matter of Divine Consideration," he says. "They were avoiding the density of religious-sounding language, and that would be an example of somebody maybe noting what spiritual or religious principle it represented, simultaneously written in pragmatic language."
From "prescribing" to "describing" a program of recovery
Widespread changes in the manuscript signal AA's decision to avoid prescriptive language -- such as "you should do this" -- in favor of descriptive language -- such as "we did this." Holmquist says this typifies AA's strategy of addressing the newcomer with gentleness and accessibility while maintaining respect for the medical community.
"They were respecting the attitude of the newcomer as perhaps being defensive or quick to run," he says. "Also, to other professionals, it was clear they took out specific references that could make the authors sound like they were prescribing medical or psychiatric or psychological recommendations."
Holmquist attributes the original use of a prescriptive voice as the result of the founding members' sincerity and seriousness about their program of recovery. "Their heart was right, but they realized in looking at it that it would probably be overwhelming for a newcomer to look at and think, ‘I have to do all of this stuff,'" he says. "So they just reverted to sharing what they did, which is what I think is at the heart of attraction not promotion."
Click here for larger image
This is evident in the paragraph following the final step on page 31, where the original text read: "You may exclaim, what an order! I can't go through with it!" The contributors changed this to, "Many of us exclaimed," which allows the newcomer to share in the original AA fellowship's own experience of feeling overwhelmed by the program's requirements.
"These people realized it was far more pragmatic to … settle for doing a little bit better each day," Holmquist says. "That's why the idea of this being both a program of action and a fellowship is so important, because you get so much from the combination of both versus just one.""
Friday, 9 October 2009
Road to Recovery Cult group (Plymouth) move into the "Recovery Business"
Well they're at it again - breaking another Tradition - so what's new! It occurred to the aacultwatch team it would be easier to carry news of when the aforementioned group DID actually abide by the Traditions - it would save a lot of a time all round. But a little background first:
"The Recovery Business"
The recession may be biting hard but some sectors are flourishing - which brings us to: "The Recovery Business". By this we mean the increasing proliferation of "workshops" (non-AA events) run by various "personalities" (some travelling from as far afield as sunny California) spreading their views, opinions, theories, speculations, hypotheses, (even experience occasionally!) on whatever passing fad is currently preoccupying them, and then presenting these flights of fancy suitably packaged for the delectation of the "punters" ie. anyone who may be parted from their money. These little shindigs sometimes run for a whole weekend for those brave souls who are willing to pay to listen for that long to these largely unoriginal performances. The "gig" may include Power Point presentations for the more technologically sophisticated but will certainly include workbooks, worksheets etc all of which lends an air of authenticity to what is essentially a scam. It's easier to part someone from their cash if they wander (usually shell-shocked) from the venue with at least something to show for the "experience" other than a rictus grin, and a throbbing headache acquired from a massive overdose of "emotional froth". Now we have no real objection to an enterprising fellow making a buck or two, and let's face it there are considerably more than one "born every day" but in this instance the "target market" is composed mostly of newcomers to AA, and certainly members new to the recovery programme. These are more likely to be impressed by a slick performance and a well rehearsed delivery with standardised jokes flying from the lip with practised ease. If you've still suffering, with nerves jangling like taut banjo strings, and your emotions and life in tatters, wandering around the landscape like some refugee in a war zone then anyone who can string a few coherent sentences together must seem almost blessed with Divine omniscience. "Recycling" is the buzz word these days and that's about all you're likely to get at one of these workshops. But that said so will you at an AA meeting - nothing original there either - but there's one crucial difference. In the first you'll get parted from your dough in short order one way or the other - in the latter you'll get it for free, and without all the unnecessary trimmings.
It would seem that the Road to Recovery cult group (among others) is getting in on the act. For some considerable time now audio files by various notables (including overseas imports) have been available via their website but evidently this cult group has decided to move into "marketing" other events. These include the Bristol Reunion, which this year features a couple of speakers from the US (apparently one of whom is an " an ideal successor to Joe and Charlie"). It's not made entirely clear what constitutes "ideal" (given that the programme refers to "progress rather than perfection") but we have to assume that the guy turns in a good act (together with his humble assistant). Additionally the site advertises another "show" in Glasgow in 2010 featuring a VVVVVIP from LA, the Venerable C, who will be doing "a turn" in that fair city. There is no mention on the site (which incidentally carries the disclaimer "© Road to Recovery Group 2009. This site is not approved or endorsed by Alcoholics Anonymous. The views expressed belong solely to the individuals making them") that this is NOT an AA event nor for that matter is the "Relationships in Recovery" circus, which is similarly advertised on this cult website. But then (with a little more research) we come to the Glasgow extravaganza's sound system, which is being provided by an organisation called SoundsGood Media Productions, an outfit needless to say but we'll say it anyway, NOT associated with AA. We quote from the "About Us" section of their site:
"Sounds Good Media is a voluntary service staffed by members of 12 Step fellowships who give their time voluntarily to help themselves stay sober and help others to recover from alcoholism.
Sounds Good Media was set up by a small group of AA members involved in service who detected a great inconsistency in the quality of Public Address systens used at various AA conventions. Having detected this problem they decided to solve it by supplying AA with a reliable P.A. system. The next problem was how to fund th P.A. system. The solution for this was already at hand, record the meetings and sell the tapes. This also helped to solve another problem which was widespread (that of bad quality tapes or no taping of conventions at all - which left no archival record of previous members). So the idea was simply, supply P.A. system, record the meetings, sell the tapes and any excess money goes back into AA.
To comply with traditions a letter was sent to the World General Service Office in New York explaining the concept. The W.G.S.O. replied that AA could not accept money from outside organisations even though they are run by AA members. So Sounds Good couldn't give money to AA, but they could stop convention committes spending money on P.A's by supplying theirs free of charge. The only stipulation for this was that Sounds Good could sell tapes to fund the P.A. system. Due to public demand it was decided to expand the selection of tapes to include popular speakers from America etc. Again there was the problem of quality, so equipment was needed to 'clean' these tapes up. It soon became clear an office would be needed, so from humble beginnings our expansion had developed. This led to more volunteers joining, who used it as an aid to their recovery and went on to other things."
Now this may all be very worthy but in the end it amounts to what is technically known as a "lash up" ie. some way had to be devised to make it "look like" AA Traditions weren't being circumvented (we'll leave it to you to work out which ones) but fails utterly. In this particular instance we can't see what the problem is. The event itself is not AA sponsored and therefore does not have to abide by the Traditions. But even if it were an AA convention, workshop etc then this particular contrivance would still not solve the "problem". AA would be receiving a service for which it hadn't paid ie. a donation in kind rather than money (Incidentally, since when did it become a problem that there were no audio records, bad quality or otherwise, of speakers at a convention?) All sorts of difficulties arise here in connection with this issue - again we'll leave it to your ingenuity to discern what these might be. Finally there is reference to any "excess money" going back into AA, which seems to defeat entirely the purpose of the whole exercise. Whose money is this? If it's AA money then how can it "go back" to AA? If it's from Sounds Good Media profits then it's an outside donation - back to square one? Is it the copyright holder's money? Is it the publisher's money and so on and so forth? This situation illustrates perfectly why the Traditions exist, and why it's such a bad idea to try and "lawyer" your way round them.
Still it's been quite awhile - if ever - since the Road to Recovery cult group was an AA group running AA meetings and (as we mentioned above) we should really only be surprised when it does behave like one. But then Little Wayne (El Supremo) has as good as said so himself in his address to the faithful (available on an audio file from site): We quote:
"If you’re new or if you’re visiting this group – welcome. This group comes with a public health warning. Tonight you’re not in a meeting or mainstream meeting of Alcoholics Anonymous. Tonight you are at the heart of Alcoholics Anonymous."
and who are we to argue with Little Wayne.
Now here's an idea, and we're not even going to plug our own recovery course outlined on the site - Oh damn! We did. Sorry! Instead of wandering off to one of these "workshops" or "conventions" or "Big Book Study Groups?" or "Newcomers?" meetings or "Beginners?" meetings or buying a CD produced by whoever is the latest flavour of the month, keep your money in your pocket and go to an AA meeting - a REAL one. There you will find some ordinary joe who will probably read something out of the Big Book, and then AA will do what it does best - plain alcoholics telling it the way it is - no frills - no "froth" - no charge!! You may well have to sit through the "Great Saga of the Washing machine Breaking Down and How the Repairman Didn't Turn Up But Even So I Didn't Pick Up a Drink" from time to time, and there may be some members who are seriously "off message" on that particular day; but that comes with the territory. But we think that's a small price to pay to avoid having to witness a carefully choreographed, marketing platform for "personalities" who seem to have an insatiable need (craving perhaps?) to have their egos massaged regularly whilst topping up their bank accounts. Even better the newcomer can - if she or he is so inclined - go online at the official AA website, and read the Big Book FOR FREE and maybe make up their own minds about what constitutes the recovery programme of AA and how they want - or don't want - to do it. Wow! That's soooo radical!!!
Cheerio
The Fellas
"The Recovery Business"
The recession may be biting hard but some sectors are flourishing - which brings us to: "The Recovery Business". By this we mean the increasing proliferation of "workshops" (non-AA events) run by various "personalities" (some travelling from as far afield as sunny California) spreading their views, opinions, theories, speculations, hypotheses, (even experience occasionally!) on whatever passing fad is currently preoccupying them, and then presenting these flights of fancy suitably packaged for the delectation of the "punters" ie. anyone who may be parted from their money. These little shindigs sometimes run for a whole weekend for those brave souls who are willing to pay to listen for that long to these largely unoriginal performances. The "gig" may include Power Point presentations for the more technologically sophisticated but will certainly include workbooks, worksheets etc all of which lends an air of authenticity to what is essentially a scam. It's easier to part someone from their cash if they wander (usually shell-shocked) from the venue with at least something to show for the "experience" other than a rictus grin, and a throbbing headache acquired from a massive overdose of "emotional froth". Now we have no real objection to an enterprising fellow making a buck or two, and let's face it there are considerably more than one "born every day" but in this instance the "target market" is composed mostly of newcomers to AA, and certainly members new to the recovery programme. These are more likely to be impressed by a slick performance and a well rehearsed delivery with standardised jokes flying from the lip with practised ease. If you've still suffering, with nerves jangling like taut banjo strings, and your emotions and life in tatters, wandering around the landscape like some refugee in a war zone then anyone who can string a few coherent sentences together must seem almost blessed with Divine omniscience. "Recycling" is the buzz word these days and that's about all you're likely to get at one of these workshops. But that said so will you at an AA meeting - nothing original there either - but there's one crucial difference. In the first you'll get parted from your dough in short order one way or the other - in the latter you'll get it for free, and without all the unnecessary trimmings.
It would seem that the Road to Recovery cult group (among others) is getting in on the act. For some considerable time now audio files by various notables (including overseas imports) have been available via their website but evidently this cult group has decided to move into "marketing" other events. These include the Bristol Reunion, which this year features a couple of speakers from the US (apparently one of whom is an " an ideal successor to Joe and Charlie"). It's not made entirely clear what constitutes "ideal" (given that the programme refers to "progress rather than perfection") but we have to assume that the guy turns in a good act (together with his humble assistant). Additionally the site advertises another "show" in Glasgow in 2010 featuring a VVVVVIP from LA, the Venerable C, who will be doing "a turn" in that fair city. There is no mention on the site (which incidentally carries the disclaimer "© Road to Recovery Group 2009. This site is not approved or endorsed by Alcoholics Anonymous. The views expressed belong solely to the individuals making them") that this is NOT an AA event nor for that matter is the "Relationships in Recovery" circus, which is similarly advertised on this cult website. But then (with a little more research) we come to the Glasgow extravaganza's sound system, which is being provided by an organisation called SoundsGood Media Productions, an outfit needless to say but we'll say it anyway, NOT associated with AA. We quote from the "About Us" section of their site:
"Sounds Good Media is a voluntary service staffed by members of 12 Step fellowships who give their time voluntarily to help themselves stay sober and help others to recover from alcoholism.
Sounds Good Media was set up by a small group of AA members involved in service who detected a great inconsistency in the quality of Public Address systens used at various AA conventions. Having detected this problem they decided to solve it by supplying AA with a reliable P.A. system. The next problem was how to fund th P.A. system. The solution for this was already at hand, record the meetings and sell the tapes. This also helped to solve another problem which was widespread (that of bad quality tapes or no taping of conventions at all - which left no archival record of previous members). So the idea was simply, supply P.A. system, record the meetings, sell the tapes and any excess money goes back into AA.
To comply with traditions a letter was sent to the World General Service Office in New York explaining the concept. The W.G.S.O. replied that AA could not accept money from outside organisations even though they are run by AA members. So Sounds Good couldn't give money to AA, but they could stop convention committes spending money on P.A's by supplying theirs free of charge. The only stipulation for this was that Sounds Good could sell tapes to fund the P.A. system. Due to public demand it was decided to expand the selection of tapes to include popular speakers from America etc. Again there was the problem of quality, so equipment was needed to 'clean' these tapes up. It soon became clear an office would be needed, so from humble beginnings our expansion had developed. This led to more volunteers joining, who used it as an aid to their recovery and went on to other things."
Now this may all be very worthy but in the end it amounts to what is technically known as a "lash up" ie. some way had to be devised to make it "look like" AA Traditions weren't being circumvented (we'll leave it to you to work out which ones) but fails utterly. In this particular instance we can't see what the problem is. The event itself is not AA sponsored and therefore does not have to abide by the Traditions. But even if it were an AA convention, workshop etc then this particular contrivance would still not solve the "problem". AA would be receiving a service for which it hadn't paid ie. a donation in kind rather than money (Incidentally, since when did it become a problem that there were no audio records, bad quality or otherwise, of speakers at a convention?) All sorts of difficulties arise here in connection with this issue - again we'll leave it to your ingenuity to discern what these might be. Finally there is reference to any "excess money" going back into AA, which seems to defeat entirely the purpose of the whole exercise. Whose money is this? If it's AA money then how can it "go back" to AA? If it's from Sounds Good Media profits then it's an outside donation - back to square one? Is it the copyright holder's money? Is it the publisher's money and so on and so forth? This situation illustrates perfectly why the Traditions exist, and why it's such a bad idea to try and "lawyer" your way round them.
Still it's been quite awhile - if ever - since the Road to Recovery cult group was an AA group running AA meetings and (as we mentioned above) we should really only be surprised when it does behave like one. But then Little Wayne (El Supremo) has as good as said so himself in his address to the faithful (available on an audio file from site): We quote:
"If you’re new or if you’re visiting this group – welcome. This group comes with a public health warning. Tonight you’re not in a meeting or mainstream meeting of Alcoholics Anonymous. Tonight you are at the heart of Alcoholics Anonymous."
and who are we to argue with Little Wayne.
Now here's an idea, and we're not even going to plug our own recovery course outlined on the site - Oh damn! We did. Sorry! Instead of wandering off to one of these "workshops" or "conventions" or "Big Book Study Groups?" or "Newcomers?" meetings or "Beginners?" meetings or buying a CD produced by whoever is the latest flavour of the month, keep your money in your pocket and go to an AA meeting - a REAL one. There you will find some ordinary joe who will probably read something out of the Big Book, and then AA will do what it does best - plain alcoholics telling it the way it is - no frills - no "froth" - no charge!! You may well have to sit through the "Great Saga of the Washing machine Breaking Down and How the Repairman Didn't Turn Up But Even So I Didn't Pick Up a Drink" from time to time, and there may be some members who are seriously "off message" on that particular day; but that comes with the territory. But we think that's a small price to pay to avoid having to witness a carefully choreographed, marketing platform for "personalities" who seem to have an insatiable need (craving perhaps?) to have their egos massaged regularly whilst topping up their bank accounts. Even better the newcomer can - if she or he is so inclined - go online at the official AA website, and read the Big Book FOR FREE and maybe make up their own minds about what constitutes the recovery programme of AA and how they want - or don't want - to do it. Wow! That's soooo radical!!!
Cheerio
The Fellas
Wednesday, 7 October 2009
In The Spirit--not The Letter--of Alcoholics Anonymous (from Grapevine 2007)
Love, not worship, for the Big Book
"My friends (and enemies) had diagnosed the problem--I could not drink without getting drunk. They weren't telling me anything I didn't know. And they offered no solution except, "Just don't drink," or, "Stop when you've had enough." If I could have done that, I would have. I'd tried countless times to control my drinking and always failed. In the end, I reached that state of "pitiful and incomprehensible demoralization" described in the book, Alcoholics Anonymous. A suicide attempt landed me in the hospital and a psychiatrist told me I should go to AA. So I made the call.
Two AA members twelfth-stepped me, and one of them gave me his copy of the Big Book as he left. "You can borrow this for a week," he growled, "and then you must get your own." And I did. At an AA meeting a week later, I returned his book and bought my own copy.
During their visit, I had asked the man with the book how AA worked. He had opened it at chapter five, shoved it in front of me and said, "That's how it works."
After he and his companion left that night, I sat down and read the book. The scales fell from my eyes. I'd known for years that there was something terribly wrong with the way I drank. Many people had scolded, lectured, demanded, threatened, pleaded, and implored me to "do something about your drinking." Heaven knows, I'd tried. I loved getting drunk--but I hated being a drunk. I felt humiliated, ashamed, guilty, mortified, and disgusted by my behavior during my binges.
"The Doctor's Opinion" explained a mystery that had baffled me for years--why couldn't I just get pleasantly high without descending into the chaos of uncontrolled excess? I read that I'd been in the grip of an obsession and, once I started to drink, I couldn't stop because the craving was more powerful than my good intentions and willpower. The book told how other men and women, similarly afflicted, had overcome the problem. I wanted what they had.
The chapter "There Is a Solution" says, "If you are an alcoholic who wants to get over it, you may already be asking--'What do I have to do?'" The logical answer to the question, "What do I have to do?" is "You must do this."
The Big Book answers this question tangentially; the Twelve Steps are suggestions that we are invited to follow, not commandments we must obey. The book points the way; it does not issue instructions. In chapter five, I read, "With all the earnestness at our command, we beg of you to be fearless and thorough from the very start." By following the Big Book's suggestions for twenty-one years, I have had a life truly beyond my wildest dreams.
I have copies of all four editions of the Big Book, including a facsimile copy of the original with its red and yellow dust cover. (An AA member would not have been very anonymous walking to a meeting with that under her arm!)
I love the Big Book but do not worship it. That would be idolatry. The book itself does not claim to be infallible. The writers acknowledge their limitations.
"Upon therapy for the alcoholic himself, we surely have no monopoly," they write. "We realize we know only a little," they caution. "God will constantly disclose more to you and to us."
"By no means do we offer [our approach] as the last word on this subject, but...it has worked for us," they say.
I've heard the Big Book referred to as a textbook, which I think is a mistake. I believe it is our basic text, which is not the same thing at all. The Big Book is a storybook. It says so on the title page--"Alcoholics Anonymous--The Story of How Many Thousands of Men and Women Have Recovered from Alcoholism." A story does not give instructions; it is a narrative of experience, a work of inspired imagination. Bill W. wrote, in As Bill Sees It, "Most Steps are open to interpretation, based on the experience and outlook of the individual."
The Big Book is not sacred scripture; we have no "authorities" in AA who can impose their understanding of its message on the rest of us.
It is dangerous to make a fetish of the written word. As the Bible says, "The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life."
Laurie A.
Essex"
"My friends (and enemies) had diagnosed the problem--I could not drink without getting drunk. They weren't telling me anything I didn't know. And they offered no solution except, "Just don't drink," or, "Stop when you've had enough." If I could have done that, I would have. I'd tried countless times to control my drinking and always failed. In the end, I reached that state of "pitiful and incomprehensible demoralization" described in the book, Alcoholics Anonymous. A suicide attempt landed me in the hospital and a psychiatrist told me I should go to AA. So I made the call.
Two AA members twelfth-stepped me, and one of them gave me his copy of the Big Book as he left. "You can borrow this for a week," he growled, "and then you must get your own." And I did. At an AA meeting a week later, I returned his book and bought my own copy.
During their visit, I had asked the man with the book how AA worked. He had opened it at chapter five, shoved it in front of me and said, "That's how it works."
After he and his companion left that night, I sat down and read the book. The scales fell from my eyes. I'd known for years that there was something terribly wrong with the way I drank. Many people had scolded, lectured, demanded, threatened, pleaded, and implored me to "do something about your drinking." Heaven knows, I'd tried. I loved getting drunk--but I hated being a drunk. I felt humiliated, ashamed, guilty, mortified, and disgusted by my behavior during my binges.
"The Doctor's Opinion" explained a mystery that had baffled me for years--why couldn't I just get pleasantly high without descending into the chaos of uncontrolled excess? I read that I'd been in the grip of an obsession and, once I started to drink, I couldn't stop because the craving was more powerful than my good intentions and willpower. The book told how other men and women, similarly afflicted, had overcome the problem. I wanted what they had.
The chapter "There Is a Solution" says, "If you are an alcoholic who wants to get over it, you may already be asking--'What do I have to do?'" The logical answer to the question, "What do I have to do?" is "You must do this."
The Big Book answers this question tangentially; the Twelve Steps are suggestions that we are invited to follow, not commandments we must obey. The book points the way; it does not issue instructions. In chapter five, I read, "With all the earnestness at our command, we beg of you to be fearless and thorough from the very start." By following the Big Book's suggestions for twenty-one years, I have had a life truly beyond my wildest dreams.
I have copies of all four editions of the Big Book, including a facsimile copy of the original with its red and yellow dust cover. (An AA member would not have been very anonymous walking to a meeting with that under her arm!)
I love the Big Book but do not worship it. That would be idolatry. The book itself does not claim to be infallible. The writers acknowledge their limitations.
"Upon therapy for the alcoholic himself, we surely have no monopoly," they write. "We realize we know only a little," they caution. "God will constantly disclose more to you and to us."
"By no means do we offer [our approach] as the last word on this subject, but...it has worked for us," they say.
I've heard the Big Book referred to as a textbook, which I think is a mistake. I believe it is our basic text, which is not the same thing at all. The Big Book is a storybook. It says so on the title page--"Alcoholics Anonymous--The Story of How Many Thousands of Men and Women Have Recovered from Alcoholism." A story does not give instructions; it is a narrative of experience, a work of inspired imagination. Bill W. wrote, in As Bill Sees It, "Most Steps are open to interpretation, based on the experience and outlook of the individual."
The Big Book is not sacred scripture; we have no "authorities" in AA who can impose their understanding of its message on the rest of us.
It is dangerous to make a fetish of the written word. As the Bible says, "The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life."
Laurie A.
Essex"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)