An aspect of the co-dependent system that is often overlooked is referred to as agency. Agency is the misbegotten perception that our actions can influence and control the behavior of others. One particularly perilous instance of agency is when it manifests in relationship to relationship - when we try to force a current relationship into the mold of an archetypal complex in a misguided, and quite futile, effort to fix that past relationship.
John grew up in an environment where, no matter what he did, he was given the message that it wasn't good enough. As he matured, the morbid sense of "less than" and insecurity that this bred manifested in several different ways.
On the one hand, John was an overachiever - surpassing all standards of "average" and usually even "superior" in everything to which he put his hand. Although he couldn't see it, he turned out to be a quite complex and rather amazing human being.
On the downside, he had a tendency to overcompensate through a tendency toward self-inflation and arrogance, overt self and other deceit, and an effort to be all things to all people.
In terms of relationships, John tended to choose situations that mimicked his parenting experience and then impose himself on the relationship in such a way as to control it, wrenching it into something it wasn't so that he could play out a fixed fantasy about what his parenting experience should have looked like.
Sounds like John's got some issues, right? Well, not so much. John's experience and his response to that experience - while unique to him - at a meta-level is fairly common. His is a perfect example of agency and the failure of Witness consciousness.
The Witness is "s/he who sees all". It is the non-attached, non-judgmental observer that is not bound by ego. On a less metaphysical, and more accessible, note, Witness might be referred to as Objective Ego, or our own personal Watcher.
Agency is about control and the exercise of control in relationship. Witness consciousness is about passive global observation. When we attempt to control something, we are attempting to force it into a mold of our choosing, rather than seeing it - in its entirety - for what it is and responding to that, rather than reacting to our own needs. Reacting, rather than responding, is the failure of Witness consciousness. It leads us down a path where we will never get our needs met because one can't get something to do what it's not going to do on its own.
For John's part, it was somehow more productive for him to revisit the pain and loneliness of his childhood, trying in vain to fix something from the past that could not be fixed in the moment, rather than seeing (read: witnessing) the whole picture and recognizing how his archetypal complex was playing out in that picture. Had he done that, he would have been able to withdraw his own neurosis from the current situation and participate in that relationship more authentically.
Ironically, withdrawing his neurosis from the current relationship would likely have led to its demise, rather than perpetuate it, because the manner of his participation was reflected and complemented by his partner's needs. If he came at the relationship without that neurotic system in place, the relationship wouldn't work because, with his neurosis out of the way, his partner's neurosis would have no one to play with - that's where the co-dependence piece comes in.
The role of Witness consciousness is seeing the whole picture. It is recognizing what it is in us that prompts us to make the choices that we make. With that in hand, we can then see how the propensity toward those choices plays out, whether productively or unproductively, in our relationships.
As long as we remain trapped in a system of agency, attempting to control our world through the imposition of our actions, we live in a state of inauthenticity. That is because we are not in a relationship, but once removed -- in a relationship to a relationship -- and that relationship is one that is long past. The only means for fixing this is to backtrack into the archetypal complex and addressing the issues and emotions attached to that relationship because we are not going to fix the past in the here and now.
If John chose to confront the emotions - all the emotions - associated with his parenting and not deny the existence of any, he would then be able to resolve those emotions, integrating them into his perception of himself and transforming his expectations. Succeeding in this, his role in relationship would then become one of just "being", both literally and metaphysically, in the relationship. He would no longer have to impose himself, inflate himself, live in a state of emotional denial or self or other deceit, but he would only need to show up.
Authenticity in relationship means being present and being present means tearing aside the veil to witness ourselves, our vulnerabilities and our strengths - and how those things play out in the world -- in their totality.
© 2009 Michael J. Formica, All Rights Reserved
Michael's Mailing List | Michael's eMail | Follow Michael on Twitter
Michael on Facebook | The Integral Life Institute on Facebook
