Book Review: The Reality Game

In his rather scathing article, Existential Analysis and Humanistic Psychotherapy (Journal of the Society for Existential Analysis, January 2000), John Rowan states that "humanistic psychotherapy in all its variants... is the real home of existentialism as a praxis, doing justice to all it has to offer. Existential analysis, on the other hand, is a heresy, a cult, a sideshow by comparison, cruelly limiting itself by not using the range of interventions made possible by the endeavours of humanistic practitioners." (p.74)

From Rowan's standpoint then, his interpretation of humanistic therapy should illustrate this assertion. So, what is so good about Rowan's humanistic therapy that means it is a place where existential analysis can productively dwell? Rowan's honest, provocative, yet ultimately flawed critique of existential analysis can be addressed in two ways. First, one might ask what Rowan has to say about therapy and being human? Second, what does Rowan actually mean when he talks about 'existential therapy'?

The Reality Game can be seen as an introductory guide, due to the wide range of topics that Rowan covers - from theoretical underpinnings and aims, through assessment and the opening sessions, to issues of ethics, research, and supervision. It is a very individualistic account of humanistic therapy. There is psychodynamic theory here, as well as transpersonal influences, and a big emphasis on early experiences as a therapeutic source for liberation. Indeed, one could question the validity of Rowan calling his theory 'humanistic'.

According to Rowan "The humanistic psychotherapist has unlimited aims. What we do is to set the client's feet on a path which has no finite end."(p.73). In The Reality Game death does not seem to enter as a fact or even an issue for Rowan. In existential terms death, our 'being-towards-death', is liberating as well as limiting. It brings into the light the fact of our choices, what we cannot choose, and a certain urgency and necessity of an individual commitment to life. Of course it can become a preoccupation and the existential 'ultimate concerns' do need to be addressed in a constructive way.

Apart from the question of finiteness and death here we need to look at Rowan's notion of 'the real self' that he sees as the most significant 'way-station' on this infinite path. A major divergence from an existential vision of the self is that although some of Rowan's ideas on our defences against experiencing our 'real self' may be analogous to existential descriptions of bad faith or inauthenticity, we find that 'underneath all this positive and negative stuff there is the real self, which is perfectly OK.' (p.75) This is something to discover, buried under layers rather than something to continually create and bring into being through choices and action. But for some, perhaps most, existentialists (has Rowan forgotten Sartre's 'existence precedes essence'?), the authentic self is fluid and exists through action. It is not some 'thing' to excavate.

This typical humanistic standpoint is frequently repeated in The Reality Game. We are told again that, "deep down underneath it all where it really counts, you are OK." (p.2) But is it really that which is "deep down underneath it all" that "really counts"? Counts in what way? Where is this 'deep down'? Do our clients feel 'ok' underneath it all? What is it 'ok'? If they don't think this do we need to convince them, or influence them, in believing that deep down all is 'ok'? What is the nature of the existence of this 'ok' self? A client may genuinely decide that they have lived a generally destructive life. What is it that they find underneath which is 'ok'? There should be 'ok' characteristics of course, but a 'self' that is 'ok'? Perhaps he refers to our potential to live free, responsible and creative lives. If so, this is potential and future directed not something underneath, and certainly not something solid.

If an existential therapeutic theory of the self maps out the 'authentic self' (not all do of course) then it should describe a self that is aware of, and committed to, its own responsibility for its process of becoming - it is always choosing. Hence, if we compare existential 'authentic selfhood' with the humanistic 'real self', we find that the existential version has an emphasis on the future and choice and hence freedom and responsibility, while the humanistic vision, at least in Rowan's eyes, is more about uncovering and discarding layers of unreality to discover something 'real' that is already there.

Rowan describes various stages of self-development, which have some kind of recognisable linear movement, whereby the previous self is left behind for another plane, or level of existence. So, for instance, "by saying that the aims are unlimited, we wish to make it clear that if someone wants to go beyond the real self, that is fine with us." (p.85) These are partly illustrated in a chapter on "The process of development", that consists of three theories that contain much that contradicts existential philosophy. For instance, 'Primal Integration' states "that neuroses and psychoses often come ultimately from early trauma." (p. 145). Therefore, "we have to go back down the chain of crises to find the original trauma or traumatic situation." (p. 147). Wilber's 'Transpersonal Theory' contains spiritual issues and while existential therapy welcomes the exploration of all our clients' values, including their spiritual values, it does so from its philosophy of individual choice and meaning. But Rowan's citation of Wilber implies something more direct and goes further by actually introducing spiritual ideas into the theory itself:

going beyond the centaur categories of 'meaning in my life': we are giving up intentionality and self-actualisation; we are letting go of self-autonomy. We are thinking more in terms of obedience and surrender. (p. 157)

But obedience and surrender to who or what? These areas, which are 'transpersonally sensitive', can apparently be 'developed by practice.' (ibid). We hear that, 'moving on from the real self to the higher self is just as problematic, just as difficult, just as much of a breakthrough, as moving on from the mental ego to the real self was. (p.85)

So the higher self exists for Rowan. It is further along the stage of human development and supposedly transcends the 'real self'. This is the area where 'we really get in touch with higher powers outside of ourselves.' (ibid). Now of course if our client embraces such things then fine, that is part of their own value system and choices. I want to understand what these notions mean to my client and the living of their life and the problems they have. But for Rowan, although he clearly states a number of times throughout the book that a therapist should not dictate to the client, one wonders how his own beliefs on such matters influence his therapy and his clients-apparently 'higher powers outside of ourselves', such as 'higher presences', 'guardian angels', are examples of 'powerful tools at this stage, being given to us rather than chosen by us.' (p. 157)

The values of self-determination are related to freedom and choice, and also to uncertainty. Rowan consistently undermines his belief in freedom and self-determination by his theories. For example, he explains that he has stopped his vagueness about how long therapy may take, and now says "for any therapy worth bothering about, we should think in terms of a years work together, before we start to worry whether we are getting far enough." (p.54). So, no personal growth 'worth bothering about' happens under a year? Well, this is simply wrong, and I am unsure of what else to say about Rowan's bizarre remark. It is an example of a therapist's directiveness and misleading certainty, which might actually undermine a client's potential for positive change. The power of this sort of statement by a therapist could have far reaching effects on the client. It also sets up the therapist as an expert on the client's problems and their solution. If anything is 'cruelly limiting' it is this sort of erroneous statement.

Part of Rowan's problem is that he makes statements that are not questioned or backed up with 'good enough' arguments. On page two for instance we are told that; "We can be all that we have it in us to be." (p.2) This is a very naive and anti-existential statement and surely wrong. Existential philosophy embraces potential but a realistic and truthful potential. Our choices always involve the rejection of other choices we cannot make as well. We could have chosen, and we could choose, otherwise.

Rowan's reading of existential philosophy leaves a lot to be desired. If what he thinks is existential is good then this does not matter, but the fact is that, ironically, the therapeutic theory of The Reality Game (his practise is another question) is permeated with inconsistencies and potentially destructive ideals for an individual client's freedom and growth. Where Rowan feels that existential analysis is "cruelly limiting" I would suggest that it is Rowan's avoidance of an existential creative freedom on the one hand, and the more anxiety provoking elements of human being-e.g. responsibility, death and uncertainty-which end up limiting his theory.

If humanistic ideas, gimmicks, techniques and interventions do not contradict existential values and actually help enable more authentic existential living then they should be welcomed. There are some things in The Reality Game that can be welcomed. Some of this I may choose to call 'humanistic', although we should keep in mind that what is most important does not come down to the label one gives to one's therapeutic orientation.

But in the final analysis far too much of The Reality Game contradicts an existential foundation to life and the practise of therapy. Rowan's theory, at least in this book, does little to address the problem of what existential therapy is, or what it could be. In fact he undermines and then consequently muddles his argument by misunderstanding existential philosophy in the first place. More importantly, this book offers little new insight into the practise of psychotherapy and counselling in general.

John Pollard

References

Golomb, J. (1987). Nietzsche's enticing psychology of power. United States: The Magnus Press.

Rowan, J. (2000). Existential Analysis and Humanistic Psychotherapy. Journal of the Society for Existential Analysis 11.1.

Rowan, J. (2000) Back to basics: two kinds of therapy. Counselling, British Association for Counselling.

Sartre, J.-P. (1948). Existentialism and Humanism. London: Methuen.