INSTITUTIONS
The old-timers told me that we should have learned our lesson about affiliating with an institution because of the failure of what happened with the Synanon Institute of California, which I had never heard of. They were all quite familiar with it. They described it as “an early effort to make a business out of 12-Step work. That company came up with a 30-day plan of treatment. When AA’s challenged why they needed 30 days to do what AA was doing in a matter of hours, the institute began to espouse a philosophy that justified their delayed approach. They taught: ‘It’s best to take it slow and easy’.”
I said, “You’re kidding! That’s where that came from?” One old-timer was sure they started it; another said that “whether they did or not, they were the first to spread it about on a national level. They had people come in from all over the US, and then they went home and carried that philosophy with them.” Another said: “It was also in their slower version of the way the program should be worked that we got all those discussion meetings with their psychiatric and psychological slant. They pushed the notion that ‘Freudian complexes’ had a lot to do with our drinking. It’s no accident that Dr. Bob specifically singled out that exact term and said we needed to avoid discussion of ‘Freudian complexes’ in AA.”
Chief Blackhawk, who has taken nearly 1600 people through all 12 steps in recent years, said that when Synanon failed, all of the participants “flooded into AA. They brought along that ‘slow and easy’ idea, they disrupted our classes and meetings by trying to introduce discussion of psychological issues, and they pushed discussion of psychiatric behavioral problems instead of spiritual solutions.” Another said: “Yeah -- California’s contribution to AA is threefold: they gave us that ‘Hi John’ greeting -- they started that in LA; they gave us psychological discussion meetings, and they gave us the ‘slow and easy’ deal. And they and New York both started that ‘just go to meetings and keep coming back’ [manure].” (I detected that some of the early animosity between AA purists and some of the things coming out of the bigger cities still exists even today!)
So we see that our founders excluded outside affiliation for good reason. Here are some of the ideas that filtered into AA and interfered with our early success rates:
1. Non-alcoholics can led alcoholics to recovery effectively and going to meetings can treat alcoholism. (The Oxford Group proved that incorrect.)
2. An exclusive fellowship that targets only select members of society for assistance with their drinking problem can succeed. (The Oxford Group proved that incorrect.)
3. Religion can lead alcoholics to recovery. (The Oxford Group proved that incorrect; many alcoholics do use effectively -- as Dr. Bob did later on -- what religious people offer.)
4. 90-meetings-in-90-days is an effective method for approaching the treatment of alcoholism. (The Cleveland Salvation Army experience proved that incorrect.)
5. The “take it slow and easy approach” and the “discuss the psychology behind your issues that inspire you to drink” approach are effective treatments for alcoholism. (The Synanon experience proved that incorrect.)
After learning all of that from these Detroit and Akron old-timers, I had to confess that early on, I had heard and repeated much of that. They shook their heads in a show of disappointment. One said, “Maybe one at a time we can get this thing turned around.” Another said, “Yeah -- and while we’re at it, let me tell you that we lost a couple of other big battles around the Big Book content.”
I said, “Like what?” He said, “Like a New York atheist adding that ‘as we understand Him’ line and that line to newcomers to “read this volume” before we’ll talk to you again. [Heck], if I’d been told that, I’d be dead. I couldn’t read the alphabet when I came in. I figured Bill put that in to sell books, but that’s just my belief.” Another said: “When Dr. Bob and Clarence were around, we didn’t study the steps -- we worked them.” Another said, “Yes, and you notice that the 12&12 came out right AFTER Dr. Bob died, not BEFORE. That book got study groups going and newcomers were funneled into the 12&12 classes that were held instead of the Big Book classes. The 12&12 classes took newcomers 12 weeks or more to complete the steps instead of 3 or 4 hours or 3 or 4 weeks.”
Another said: “What happened was this: the newcomers would go through Session Five and then they had to write this long, drawn-out inventory before they could continue. They’d have to come back with a different group a lot of the time, because some took weeks and months to write. Most of them I saw never made it to Session Six. They disappeared. I loved Bill Wilson, but he helped create an AA disaster with that book. And I never had the guts to tell him, but my sponsor sure did. My sponsor told him, “Bill, I thought you taught me that the way you did it with me was right -- that we do the steps quickly, get the miracle, and then redo the steps for the rest of our lives. Bill didn't answer him.”
I thank Chief and Larry and Glen and the others I met in Akron for their insights.
Dr. Bob's final words to Bill Wilson were, “Let’s not louse this thing up. Let’s keep it simple.” I think it is interesting that Bill admitted that he did not respond to Dr. Bob's request. Was he overwhelmed, knowing this would probably be the last time he’d see his friend alive? Or did he know subconsciously that he wasn’t going to keep it simple? Did he already have the 12&12 in mind?
We in AA are all alike in our disease, but beyond that, quite different. I suppose that is good, for if another person and I are just alike, one of us is not necessary. Certainly Dr. Bob and Bill show the truth of that, as revealed in these comparisons that the old-timers gave me:
Dr. Bob was focused on the here and now
Bill Wilson was a visionary, looking ahead always
Dr. Bob was into behind-the-scenes work, one-on-one with a drunk
Bill Wilson was into promotion, publicity, large gatherings
Dr. Bob was into continuous spiritual growth
Bill Wilson was proud of his white-light spiritual experience
Dr. Bob said, “Why ask God each morning not to lead you into temptation, but then put yourself there?”
Bill Wilson was into keeping a bottle on the kitchen sideboard to prove temptation could be faced and overcome
Dr. Bob was quiet, generally
Bill Wilson was talkative, outgoing, ever the salesman, the pitch man
Dr. Bob suggested giving” the program away
Bill Wilson was into trying to “sell” the message to newcomers
Dr. Bob spoke of “getting one at a time.
Bill Wilson spoke of “mass production” of recovered alcoholics
Dr. Bob took newcomers through a fast-paced version of the steps to get them started and into relationship with God Bill Wilson did the same early on, but later changed his approach and told people they’d have to read the Big Book entirely before he’d work with them.
Dr. Bob worked with taking drunks through the steps right up until his failing health prevented doing so Bill Wilson got more into promotion and less into working one on one. One of the old-timers said that “Bill did it just the way Bob did it originally. Later, Bill had other interests, and he ‘culled’ out a lot of the people pressuring him for help by assigning that reading. That’s my theory.”
I have no proof about any of those comparisons, and I take no side in these debates. I know that both Dr. Bob and Bill Wilson were necessary for this thing of ours to exist. Maybe one approach of theirs might have been best with some, the opposite with others. But I continue to hear what one of those men said to me: “If I’d been told that [I had to read the whole Book], I’d be dead. I couldn’t read the alphabet when I came in. I figured Bill put that in to sell books, but that’s just my belief.”
Is it possible that we can tap into and use the best of both worlds, so to speak? The best of what both men offer? Is it possible that the man or woman who cannot understand the Book on arriving is entitled to our expertise, entitled to have us take the essence of the message in the Book that Bill (for the most part) wrote, but then offer that message in a simple manner that the newcomer who is suffering can grasp? Isn't it possible that we can take the message of the Big Book and simplify it so that newcomers can get their miracle in the shortest time possible -- the way our founders did for their protégés, since all real alcoholics face a life or death situation and need help NOW?
For those of us who now know what worked and what does not, and who know the message in the Big Book, and have experienced the truth of the Big Book, I hope that we can join into a new unity, in a unified effort to use what our founders taught us that works and to (as they did) abandon that which has filtered in and does not work -- is not a part of true AA. May we take our knowledge and experience and present it in a simple way that any suffering newcomer can grasp? May God bless our efforts to remain sober and to help others achieve sobriety.
Copyrighted ©1998 by Floyd H. All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the prior written permission of the authors.
However, members of Alcoholics Anonymous may make use of this material free of charge, provided that no charge is made for the distribution or reproduction of the material (aside from nominal copying costs) and provided that the material is used to help others recover from alcoholism. No commercial use or reproduction by anyone is permitted with prior written permission.
